Ok, well, there's has been rumors of Buffy and Xander going to have some sort of relationship in the comics, so, who do you think Spike might end up with in the Angel comics, or who would you like to see him end up with.

I've read on some threads of people talking about Spike and Angel starting a relationship, and while I wouldn't mind that happening in the comics, I wonder if Joss would do that. I know he once called them the perfect couple, but that doesn't mean he'd put them together in the comics.

Or do you think Spike will end up with no one or a totally knew character. Maybe a sort of relationship with Illyria like James Marsters thought would happen if the show had continued. (How I wish there would be a Spike fan that helped write the comics, so he'd at least be a little happy).

Brian Lynch, the author of the Angel comics, has said that there will be a new woman who will play a significant role in Spike's life.  (If you've seen the Spike harem cover of A:AtF #2, she's one of the women in it, but Lynch hasn't said which one.)  Course that doesn't necessarily mean it will be a romantic relationship, a point also made by Lynch.

As for wishing that a Spike fan would help write the comics, you are good to go.  Lynch got the job on the basis of his Spike comic series Asylum, which he followed up with Shadow Puppets.  In those comics, Lynch gives Spike a group of people who see him as a leader and a friend, including a teenage girl who has a serious case of hero-worship for Spike; and a hot ninja fighter gal who has a major crush on Spike (even when he's a puppet!).  Team Spike saves the day in both series.  Lynch definitely loves the character, and has promised nervous fans about a million times that he's going to do right by him in the new Angel series.  I have a few small quibbles about Lynch's characterization of Spike -- but they are small.  And there's no doubting that Lynch loves our guy.

Lynch doesn't believe that Buffy loves Spike, though. I hope he doesn't use that as an incentive to pair Spike up with another character, when he only has 12 issues (give or take) to tell "Angel: After the Fall", and when Spike "doesn't feel a sense of resolution about his relationship with Buffy" and "isn't cured of loving her" (Whedon).

My predictions: Spike won't end up with anyone in "Angel: After the Fall", but we'll see more Spike/Buffy (and Angel/Buffy) in Seasons 8 and 9 of Buffy.

Well, you never know. Angel: AtF is only 12 issues for the moment. But then, Buffy season 8 was originally only supposed to be about 25. Now we're up to 40, and they're talking about season 9. So, there's always the possibility that A:AtF will continue longer than the 12 issues. 

I couldn't identify any of the women in the Spike harem (I don't even know if they're characters we've seen before), but I remember a pencil version of an alternate cover or a panel that Lynch posted on his myspace blog that featured Gwen Raiden (it also had Connor and a girl who may have been Harmony or Nina the werewolf). I'd love love love for Spike to be paired with her. Short of that, Illyria would be fun, but I can't imagine that being a serious relationship of any kind.

Whoops, that was me.

Nope, Joss has clarified that AtF will only run for 12 issues with a few extras, and will not continue indefinitely like Buffy. I'm optimistic that Spike will remain single with the exception of the Spike/Buffy interaction we've been promised in Season 8 and 9 of Buffy.

Enisy,

When I say that Lynch is a Spike fan, I mean that he likes the character and wants to do well by him.  It's true that he's said that he doesn't believe that Buffy loves Spike -- but I don't see how that can impact the comics at all, since Buffy isn't in them.  What matters for the Angel comics is what Spike believes.  And Spike believes that he has no shot at Buffy (TGIQ). 

The women on the harem coverr are all new characters.  Lynch was coy about whether the one who will be significant for Spike will turn out to be a love interest. 

If I had to guess, I'd guess that Joss is gunning for the following tragic resolution of Spuffy:  Buffy really doesn't know that Spike is alive; and she really did love him.  Spike now believes that Buffy knows that he's alive and has chosen to pursue other relationships anyway.  Spike will move on.  Buffy will move on.   By the time they finally find each other, one or both will be seriously entangled with someone else.  It'll all be so sad -- cause they could have had this great thing  if they hadn't had this tragic mutual misconception.  But, sniff, sniff, the moment has long since come and gone.  Seems like a classic Joss way to go.  Or, they do get together and then the apocalypse comes and snuffs them both out.  What doesn't happen is them walking off hand in hand to a fluffy Spuffy future.

Nah, Joss won't go there. Both he and Scott Allie have strongly hinted that Spike will be interacting with Buffy in Season 8 and Season 9 of the comic series, so she'll find out he's alive. They'll just keep stringing us along until the end, when Joss will pick Spike/Buffy or Angel/Buffy or Spike/Buffy/Angel or just go on straddling the fence (probably the last one).

They've hinted at the interaction, but they haven't, as far as I know, hinted at a continuation of the Buffy/Spike relationship. I think the scenario Maggie suggested is very Joss-like. Buffy will find out Spike is alive (either when they interact, or her discovery will result in their interaction), but by the time she does, it's too late.

Joss said he won't overuse Spike because "he means so much to Buffy, and so does Angel". That indicates, to me, that they'll keep Spike/Buffy and Angel/Buffy alive in the same way that they kept Angel/Buffy alive through seasons 4-7. I'm pretty sure that triangle will still be standing at the end of the series, no matter how many affairs Buffy may have in-between.

Eowyn is right -- there will be interaction.  But that doesn't mean that Spuffy continues.  Indeed, my scenario requires interaction.  And it even allows for Spike to remain a significant part of Buffy's life/story, just the way Angel was in seasons 4-7.  I just doubt that there'll be a happy outcome.

BTW, it's less obvious to me that Buffy/Spike/Angel will remain the central triangle.  Angel's side of things seems pretty much on life-support to me at this point.  TGIQ doesn't paint Angel's love for Buffy as being much about Buffy at all.  He doesn't even know what color her eyes are.  And as far as we can tell, Buffy's on-going feelings for Angel have not yet been adjusted for the very gray Angel we've been watching for the last few years.  Whether Spuffy happens or not, it remains a strong possibility because they know each other's darknesses already, because it seems unlikely that Spike will ever be as gray as Angel, and (relatedly) because Spike's soul and demon are integrated in a way that Angel's are not.  Now, it could be that Angel gets stuff sorted.  After the Fall looks like it's primed to really force Angel to confront his weaknesses.  But all of that growth will be happening out of the context of his relationship with Buffy, whereas all of Spike's growth happened in the context of his relationship with Buffy.  The only reason Angel is still in the picture at all is because she is some sort of icon for him, and he represents her Big Sacrifice as a slayer.  But by the end of the Chosen, Spike has answered all of that.  Where Buffy's love cost Angel his soul, Spike's love for Buffy prompted him to get one.  Where Buffy had to kill Angel to save the world, Spike voluntarily died to save it.  Spike exactly reverses Buffy's trauma with Angel... (and I think that's a big part of the small smile Buffy has at the end of The Chosen).  Anyway, the upshot of all of that is that the structure of the story seems to rule out Angel as a real contender.  And post-Chosen, it seems at least possible that Buffy will not be able to see her story with Angel apart from the redemption of her story with Spike.

My guess is that the next triangle might well be Buffy/Spike/Xander.  Assuming Spike doesn't Shanshu, the remaining issue is whether Buffy is ultimately best mated with a human or a vampire.

Love your analysis of Spike/Buffy vs. Angel/Buffy. Reversal of her trauma with Angel... hadn't thought of it that way before.

I could see a Spike/Buffy/Xander triangle if Spike were to become a regular again, but I doubt that's in the plans. I think Joss intends to keep Spike/Buffy/Angel as the main triangle, no matter how scarce Spike and Angel's appearances in the comics may be -- otherwise he wouldn't joke about "disappointing 50% of his audience with the final Buffy story" by picking one over the other, nor would he call them "the two most important men in her life".

This picking of Spike/Buffy Angel/Buffy is starting to remind me of Dawsons creek where it was Joey/Dawson or Joey/Pacy untill she picked Pacy in the end.

Well, that will give me hope for a Spuffy ending then. 'Cause, if I recall correctly, since I've really only seen a few episodes of Dawson's Creek, everyone always thought Dawson was her 'soul-mate' but it was Pacey she ended up with. But, knowing Joss, it will be neither Spuffy nor Bangel.

Interestingly, Buffy compared Angel to Dawson ("Are you going to go all Dawson on me every time I get a boyfriend?") and Spike inadvertently equated himself with Pacey ("Pacey, you blind idiot, can't you see she doesn't love you?") Food for thought.

In all honesty, though, I think we're going to get a Spike/Buffy/Angel triangle a la "Chosen", or a threesome, or no pairing at all.

Enisy -- thanks!

Joss's comment about disappointing half the audience is consistent with the view that Angel turns out to not be a viable part of the triangle.  And even if he's not a part of Buffy's future, he's clearly important to her.  So nothing Joss has said suggests that Angel is an on-going viable option.  Moreover, to make it fit with his larger aims, he'd have to tell a lot of story about Buffy and Angel -- which would be hard to do if Angel is only to appear 'sparingly'. 

But we did get Buffy's fantasy image.  Question is whether that's a part of the real story-telling, or just a way of yanking shippers' chains.  I tend to think it's the latter. 

One thing I'm pretty sure of -- Joss isn't so interested in romance for the sake of romance.  He wants to tell a story about larger themes.  So whatever relationship questions end up getting explored have to be ones that fit into the structure of the drama in some integral way.  The vampires are all about our finding balance between our light and dark sides.  And they are all about questioning the nature of Buffy's vocation.  That's why it was so powerful.  But if a lot of that is resolved in Spike's sacrifice, Joss might want to turn to other questions.  The comics seem to be about how Slayers relate to the ordinary human world.  Bander is the relationship that would echo that concern.  And lo and behold, Bander has come up in more than a few issues of the new comics.

I never thought I would say this, but I can see the logic in Joss pairing Buffy with Xander. Not long term, beacuse I really don't see that happening. But a short term thing. Like you said Maggie Buffy now has to see where she actually fits in in human society. 'Cause let's face it, being the slayer kinda leaves you straddling the fence.

I see her turning to Xander needing him to help her understand and maybe help her find that conection. And of course it wouldn't be anything like her and Spike, in regards of love and the violence that went in the ship.

But I also find it a bit foolish on Joss' part if he decides to have Buffy and Angel end up together. Bangel was teenage love. It was fantasy, idealized, something that was not real, wasn't based in truth. She looked at Angel as her dark saviour and he held her up as this jewel which should be protected and admired from afar.

After the Hellmouth was closed, I like to think that not only did Spike mature but so did Buffy. Her maturity sould have moved her past her idealized romance with Angel, and into the mature state she would need to be in to start something serious with Spike. He's already there, just waiting for her to join him. Will she make it?

I think Xander will play a key roll in this. I think she will come to realize that the girl and the slayer need to live as one, much like how I see Spike's demon and soul does. And she needs someone who can relate to her, understand her. And the only person is Spike.

But then again I've given waaaay to much thought to this and Joss is going to give us all a heart attack when he hooks Buffy up with someone else, leaving both Spike and Angel standing in the cold. lol

Okay...Angel and Buffy don't know each other anymore (well, not for years, if we want to be realisitic).  They both have this pedestal idea of the other in their brains, and can't see the other for who they are, so for them to end up together beyond a one night stand would be insane.  Furthermore, if we can take all that occured in "Damage" to heart, Buffy's not too keen on trusting Angel these days.  If we're talking ltr's, here, Xander would beat Angel, and most definitely Spike would as well.  Showdown between Xander and Spike?  Spike would win (or make the most sense) over Xander, whether he was a vampire or shanshued. 

But I think...If Spike were to shanshu, I'm not sure he'd be tripping all over himself to get back with Buffy.  I think that would be the shove to make him move on.  I'd think that Buffy would spend more of an effort to pursue him, and Spike would be unsure of it, probably needing as well wanting to explore this new existence, and see the world solely through his own two eyes, and not be influeneced by others (Buffy or Angel).  It would've been cool to see someone like Wes help him cope with such a thing (though not in a gay way- not that there's anything wrong with that :P )

I agree with both GB and Scarlet about Angel.  Not only does it not fit in the structure, but it would be a retrogression in so many ways.  And I *really* don't think Joss would go in that direction.

Xander is tougher, much as I hate to admit it.  Reasons why it could happen (as a final outcome, and not just a short-term deal):  (1) It was the first ship that was even raised as a possibility.  If Angel weren't in the picture, something might have happened there.  (Xander was actually pretty cool back then).  But Buffy had to explore the vampire-slayer thing, and once the Angel tack exploded on her, we needed the Spike story to show how that was all supposed to work.  But if Spike has just helped Buffy to grow through those issues and the work is done, it might make sense that the more mature Buffy might be ready to go back and get the Xander thing right.  The basic idea is that the move goes from Xander - bad vampire -- good vampire -- Buffy done with vampire issues -- back to Xander.  (2) I wonder about the feminist message behind the idea that Buffy would need to land with someone who is supernatural.  One idea about female empowerment would be the notion that just as powerful men are free to marry women who aren't powerful, likewise powerful women should be free to marry men who lack power.  Joss might want to move in this direction just to affirm the feminism thing.

OTOH, there are reasons why it really shouldn't be Xander.  (1) It basically means that Xander ends up benefitting from Spuffy.  But that is a bit unfair.  Spike suffered and sacrificed a lot for Buffy to get what she got from all of that.  For Xander to end up with the cookies lacks a certain poetry.  Especially since Xander played a material role in making Spike's path even more difficult than it already was.  Xander just hasn't suffered enough/grown enough to be the end game for a Buffy who has gone through all that she has gone through. (2). It undermines feminism in a different way, by suggesting that Buffy's male friend must inevitably be a romantic partner.  (3). It suggests that Buffy's path through the vampires was a deviation, rather than her way of realizing her own power.  The fact that Buffy couldn't achieve that with Xander weakens the goodness of a final Xander/Buffy outcome.

OK, having sorted that out, I remain happily opposed to Bander as a final outcome.  Less sure, though, where Joss falls on that stuff.

I still don't think Buffy would end up with Xander as the long term guy. It's been years since I watched the old eppies, but I always got the feeling that Buffy never looked at Xander in anyway other than a friend, and that's all.

And there's nothing wrong with normal, but Buffy is not normal. She will never get "normal" in her life. I quoted normal, because normal is what we, people, make it. For Buffy slaying demons and saving the world is normal, bonking vamps and falling in love with them is normal. Yes, Xander has been there from the begining, and yes he's been there to help her through some tough times, and make so times tough for her. But it all comes down to who is Buffy's soul mate if you want to call it that. Or who is ment for her, who understands her the best. We all know Angel hardly knows her. I think it's safe to say he hardly knew her when they were dating.

Xander knows her to a point, what she allowed him to see. But Buffy hasn't let down all her walls to Xander, and honestly I can't see her ever doing that.

Spike is the only person who truly knows her. Understands her, and will take all of her. I'm not saying if the end up together it's going to be all puppies and rainbows. Because we know with those two it will never be. But it would be a true relationship, a first for both of them. It would be dirty, and grity, but loving and friendly as well. It would the the mature relationship that they both need. I hate to say it, but if in the end it didn't work out. They at least gave it a shoot. No "what if's" and the likes. And they both would grow from it.

This is why I refuse to read the comics, lol. I'll get to upset over small stuff that mean nothing.

I think Xander/Buffy will just be a temporary ship in order for Joss to explore, as Maggie explained, how Slayers relate to the ordinary human world. If Joss had stronger reasons to write Xander/Buffy (because it was the first potential ship, or because it would convey a feminist message), he would have introduced it in Season 7, when both Nicholas Brendon and Sarah pitched him the idea. Instead, he continued and softened Spike/Buffy.

he would have introduced it in Season 7, when both Nicholas Brendon and Sarah pitched him the idea.

Of course, we've also heard from James that Joss doesn't like suggestions, so a straight pitch might not have any impact. Now, if Nicky had casually mentioned to Joss that he had a crush on Sarah, we might have seen something, lol.

Also, I would imagine that not introducing a Buffy/Xander relationship that late in the game had a lot to do with not ending the show by pissing off the 90% of fans who were either Spuffy or Bangel shippers. But I don't think he's quite as concerned about that with the comics, because he's got plenty of time to make it happen, but still have Buffy go back to Spike or Angel if he wants to (not that he will, mind you, just that he can).

Joss could go into the comics planning to end it with Bander, but knowing that he has enough time to hedge his bets and change the direction if Bander gets a huge backlash from fans. He wouldn't really have had that option in season 7 - or we might've ended up with Buffy flirting with being with Angel, Spike, AND Xander all in the same episode. Yikes. Two were more than enough, thanks.

I would really love Spangel to happen. I don't think Josh will go that way. I just wish Spike won't be paired with some random comic book girl.

Spike getting paired up with some original character is my worst nightmare, too, but I don't think 12 issues will give them space to pair Spike with anyone, thank God.

Question: Since Joss has specified that AtS will only last for 12 issues, do you think he'll be able to use Spike and Angel more freely on Buffy after it's done?

Wait, hold up- Nic and Sarah pitched a Bander for s7?  Um, why?  That would've just made...zero sense.  Were they both incredibly stoned at the time?  If there was ever a time for Bander during tv canon, it would've been during season four (and this is why I don't get the whole Parker thing- he looked like a broke down, malnourished Xander anyway, and it would've been way less disturbing than Riley, and it would've made more sense for all of Xander's Spike bashing later on).  Pfft.

And random comic book girl for Spike?  Nah, unless it's just a tool to show that he's getting laid, I wouldn't care to see a Spike romance with some drawing...I hope they'll make it Spangel, cause that'd make sense, cause they more than likely loss all of their friends but Illyria, who Angel didn't really care for anyway...but yeah, that's a plot line that would, ya know, make sense and probably make a lot of people happy, and damn it, we just can't have that, can we?

Possibly. I would really, really, really want to see Buffy and Spike meet. The reaction. Would Buffy be with Xander at that time? Would she be upset Spike was alive all that time and never told her? Spike's reaction to Bander would be priceless.

That if it actually happened.

Wait, hold up- Nic and Sarah pitched a Bander for s7?  Um, why?  That would've just made...zero sense.  Were they both incredibly stoned at the time?  If there was ever a time for Bander during tv canon, it would've been during season four (and this is why I don't get the whole Parker thing- he looked like a broke down, malnourished Xander anyway, and it would've been way less disturbing than Riley, and it would've made more sense for all of Xander's Spike bashing later on).  Pfft.

Oh, they pitched a Bander in the beginning of S4, as well, but Joss turned them down then, too. Hee. I really don't think Xander/Buffy is in for the long haul, unlike Spike/Buffy and Angel/Buffy.

See I also read in a magizine that Sarah said, after season three, that her fantasy guy was Spike.

Yeah, that was in January 2000. I've heard she pitched Bander before that, although I'm not interested in that ship, so I haven't bothered to dig up the quotes.

I know that people have been saying they think that Bander was Joss' intention from the beginning, but I don't believe that, because from the beginning he had been saying that he was going to make either Xander or Willow gay, just not sure which one. He ended up making Willow gay, but it could have been Xander.

I believe it's in a commentary in Season one. Just an off-hand comment that he'd thought of making Xander Buffy's boyfriend while Angel was still going to be a temporary character. When fan reaction for Angel went through the roof, then he decided to keep Angel around and shelved Bander.

One thing to bear in mind, folks. Don't go by what they said several years ago. Joss and co. change their opinions all the time. Especially when fan reaction is not what they expected. All these ship polls that are popping up, I wouldn't be surprised if they were behind them to see which ships they use to keep the greatest number of people buying the comics.

I am Spuffy all the way, but I'd rather see Buffy dating an OC and Spike bedding a different random girl every night, than Bander or Spillyria. Of course if things get that far, I'll have stopped buying the comics so I won't see it anyway.

I could've seen Xander gay...kinda.  I could've seen him gay with Andrew, anyways.  And pitched a Bander for s4, eh?  I'm thinking this was before SMG got to work with James on a regular basis again. Xander couldn't compete with that.  But Xander definitely could've beat Riley...if they mentioned a Bander, why did we get Riley?  Was he purposely made to be a running punch line?  Maybe Joss said no to Bander then cause he wasn't sure if he would be gay or not.  And, Anya would've made tons more sense with Giles.  Just throwing that out there  :P

Oh, and I can kinda see a Spillyria...though I'm still hung up on tentative Willyria...and Spangel, so there'd have to have been tons more to make those two fall into each other's arms in order for it to make sense in my brain.  Like Angel turning to dust and not coming back for a really long time.  Yeah, then it'd make sense.

Oh, they pitched a Bander in the beginning of S4, as well, but Joss turned them down then, too.

I thought it was the other way around. I thought Joss wanted Bander in season 4, but SMG said no? It always struck me as odd, because I didn't think an actor would have veto power over the creator's idea. But maybe it was something that got bandied about and Sarah was against it, and Joss ultimately decided not to do it, for reasons that may or may not have had to do with Sarah.

I don't know about anyone else, but I always thought if Spike wasn't in love with Buffy and Dawn had been a little older they would have made an interesting couple.

I only heard that Sarah and Nick asked for Bander in season seven, which was where Joss turned them down because it's more interesting if Buffy wanted a guy she couldn't have.

 following tragic resolution of Spuffy:  Buffy really doesn't know that Spike is alive; and she really did love him.  Spike now believes that Buffy knows that he's alive and has chosen to pursue other relationships anyway.  Spike will move on.  Buffy will move on.   By the time they finally find each other, one or both will be seriously entangled with someone else.

 What doesn't happen is them walking off hand in hand to a fluffy Spuffy future.

:'(  good lord, stop making me cry! my Heart needs Spuffy to be alright in the end, doesnt need to be sunsets or happy endings just .. if they settle for others FINE, but Spike really loving someone else ... (vomit) and someone like Illyria or Wolfgirl would really 'eff me off, it would be a total pisstake and spat in the face of the whole Spuffy storyline, Joss mightve not set out to make Spuffy the way he more or less inadvertantly did spanning from their school encounter until their fiery hand clasp, TOUGH it came out that way, i think these people need to rewatch what they made which must differ a lot from how it looked/looks on paper, and write and draw after that. I dont see Buffy as a family kind of girl other then the scoobs and her slayers, she will probably have random sex here and there, either she gets her head sorted or she will never be over the incredible mindfurk Angel/Parker/Riley left her with. I see her alone, i could see her Spuffy but on and off and seeing eachother whenever they can, monogamous but no outspoken relationship. I dont think there will be I Love You's but a carry on of what Spike would experience all the time "always know what you are thinking, what you feel" extended to her aswell, the comfortableness of having had a lover for a very long time and no need for that many words, which would suit both their hearts i think. Spike will opviously have learned that she doesnt respond very well to the verbal :D

Anyways i LOVE my Spuffy, doesnt have to be happy or conventional, but i see them as having gone through well too much to start life over with new loves.

Jo

I don't think they'll be hooking Spike with another character anytime soon.

TVGO: Will you pair him with a new special someone?
Joss Whedon: ...I don't think he's the kind of guy that would be like, "Well, that was a fun time with Buffy... " I don't think he feels a sense of resolve or resolution about the relationship. I think he feels that he was ready to sacrifice himself for her, and it was a beautiful thing, but... it wasn't like he's cured of loving Buffy...

Besides, I bet they've learned their lesson from Angel/Cordelia. :P

As a Spike shipper more than a spuffy shipper I’m quite happy for him to have a new girlfriend (or boyfriend). I just want him to be happy and running after Buffy and pining over her is just sad. If he meets someone that can love him for all that he is then I’m pleased. That doesn't mean he'll ever stop loving Buffy, she’s always gonna be important but she doesn't need to be his whole world. He's his own man and has every right to some happiness. With or without Buffy.

Personally, I find 12 issues insufficient for Spike to fall in love with another girl (or guy), just one year after leaving Buffy, whom he chose over his century-long girlfriend and declared to be "the one". Heck, I would find a whole, proper season insufficient for that, but within 12 issues the notion, to me, is just laughable. His relationship with Buffy is still unresolved; let them deal with issues more important than shipping on AtS, and let them resume the Spike/Buffy/Angel triangle through cameos on BtvS S8 and S9, is my opinion.

Ok I can see where you're coming from and that's one of the reason I'm not much into comics. Of course it doesn't have to be a new girl. He's lived over one hundred years, I’m sure there's someone he's met in the past who could have been relationship material but he had been with Dru at the time.

Either way I don't really care if he sees anyone or not as long as he's happy.

Is anyone ever happy in Jossverse? :P

Re: previous acquaintance who might have been relationship material, I doubt it. Spike has always struck me as a one-woman vampire. When he's in love with Dru, there's no woman in the world but Dru. When he's in love with Buffy, there's no woman in the world but Buffy. Even assuming there was such a woman, she would be nothing more than an unfamiliar original character to the audience, which makes her an even less credible match than Angel/Harmony/Illyria/Gwen/Clem/what-have-you.

I just got the weirdest image of Spike/Clem then.

I think you could probably say Spike got over Dru a bit quick, he loved her and spent 100 years with her and then a year later it was all about Buffy. I think there's more than "One" one in someone’s lives. Dru was the one for awhile and then Buffy was the one.

You can't always control who you fall in love with and when. Maybe he thinks Buffy is still the one but then someone new comes along and love just hits him, whether he wants it or not. He certainly didn't want to love Buffy.

Or he could stay alone with unresolved issues of Buffy, which may be what the writers do.

And as a spangel girl I have no problems with Spike/Angel, if they ever jumped into bed I’d do the pylean happy dance. Then maybe Buffy could be added to the mix… But hey that’s why I read fanfic.

And I think people are happy in the jossverse but then it all falls to pieces…hmm better of he’s not happy… :P

Twelve issues is not enough time for him to fall in love with another girl, though, and anyway, I don't think they'd want to mar one of the greatest love stories in television by introducing another ship for the hell of it. The reception to Angel/Cordelia was anything but positive, precisely because it couldn't fill Angel/Buffy's shoes.

I confess I wouldn't mind Spike/Angel, but I doubt Joss will go there. I think there's a chance he'll go with a Spike/Buffy/Angel threesome at the very end of BtvS, though, which would make me a happy camper. :P

Yeah there's no chance of Spike/Angel...but I can dream. Wouldn't mind seeing Spike/Buffy/Angel.

I had no problem with Angel/Cordy but then I came to fandom late and I was never much into Buffy/Angel. I can see the attraction but...not for me.

And yeah 12 issues could never really fully introduce a new love interest for anyone, let alone Spike, which is why I’m not fully invested in these new seasons. I'll probably buy Angel series 6 but I'll never buy the Buffy comics.

I didn't particularly like Angel/Buffy or Angel/Cordelia, but the fandom must have reacted strongly to the latter, considering Joss and Tim Minear came out and admitted it was a mistake. They'll probably avoid messing with Spike/Buffy after that experience.

I'm reading both of the new seasons online. Judging by Joss's interviews, he's planning on stringing Spike/Buffy and Angel/Buffy fans along until the very end of the series, so I'm not worried about any ships that will crop up in the meantime. 'Sides, mediocre Buffy is better than no Buffy at all, in my book.

The reception to Angel/Cordelia was anything but positive, precisely because it couldn't fill Angel/Buffy's shoes.

I don't think the whole problem with Angel/Cordelia was because of Buffy. The problem was that the development of romantic feelings (for both of them) was bizarre and poorly laid out. They just didn't sell the relationship as logical, even without the Buffy baggage. Also, while I think David and Charisma play very well off each other as friends, as a romantic couple they had zero chemistry. 

If they'd paired Angel with someone else who was better suited (character- and actor-wise), I think it could easily have gotten people to move past Buffy/Angel.

You think? I don't know. I love Angel/Darla, Angel/Faith and Angel/Spike, but the Angel/Buffy fans went nuts at the thought of Angel moving on, no matter who he was moving on with.

I actually liked the Angel/Cordelia pairing. I thought they fit a little better than Buffy/Angel did. I never understood Angel/Buffy and until Spike came along I never saw anyone as a fitting partner for her.

I was holding out for a Faith/Angel.  It never came, of course...They just made sense to me, and balanced each other out, and knew the other's shoes pretty well.  And I definitely think there was chemistry, or at the very least chemistry potential.

As for Spike, I wouldn't want to see him with anyone (outside of Angel) in the twelve issues.  A new person would make sense only if there was more time for the story to develop.  Falling in love quickly isn't so unusual, but since it's only a comic, with a few pages, not so many facial expressions, etc., it just wouldn't ring as true.  If it was twelve episodes, then yeah, I could see him falling for someone else.  As it stands, if there is a romantic interest, it shouldn't be anyone but Angel, and vice versa.  And they *so* better not bring Nina back...

Eliza said David is one of her favourite people in the world, so yeah, there definitely was chemistry there.

I wouldn't mind Spike/Angel if only to see the Angel/Buffy fans' reaction. Hee! They hate Spike so much.

How dare they! My poor Spike. I wouldn't mind a Spangel pairing either, because it would be believable, but I doubt Joss would do it. Plus, it would be better if it was in a live season six, instead of comics because David and James had great chemistry, and the two actors even said they loved playing that up.

Anyway, I would love to see the bangel fans reactions if it ended with a threesome between Angel/Buffy/Spike, hehe.

You think? I don't know. I love Angel/Darla, Angel/Faith and Angel/Spike, but the Angel/Buffy fans went nuts at the thought of Angel moving on, no matter who he was moving on with.

It's hard for me to say, since I didn't actually watch the show when it was on, but it seems like Angel/Darla didn't get nearly the amount of hate that Angel/Cordelia did. And since Darla came first, I'd expect the most hate to be directed at her if it was just about Angel moving on from Buffy - especially given that Buffy is portrayed as the rebound girl in the Angel/Darla relationship! Way to diss the Bangel OTP there. Yet, Cordelia seems to get the most flak... I'd say that's because there are reasons to dislike Angel/Cordelia that had nothing to do with Buffy.

Of course, this is from my perspective as a non-Bangel fan, and I love Angel/Darla (I think they're a much more interesting and well-matched couple than Angel/Buffy) and strongly disliked Angel/Cordelia.

I loved Angel/Darla and disliked Angel/Cordelia, too, but I think the latter got more hate by the Bangels because the word "love" was thrown around, not because it lacked Angel/Darla's crazy chemistry. They were livid about Spike getting Buffy's "I love you" in "Chosen" instead of Angel, too.

I firmly believe Bangel fans are a bit nutty, holding onto Bangel when in reality all they had was "first love" i mean who doesnt feel that way for their first big love, hell even i got engaged to my first big love LOL and it was very star crossed and despair (16 and thought id found the one ha ha ha). I thought it very representative to that hollywood view on that first really passionate love.

Spuffy was more adult and no blinders on. It was as horrible as an adult relationship can be aswell, in oposite to the sugarcoated pubescant Bangel, i mean they only even sleept with eachother once and he couldnt even let himself kiss her without freaking out in season 3 ive not seen anything that imature in a LOOONG time. I wonder if the Bangel fans dont see at all how immature that relationship was. I mean did they think the love would grow and flourish during the years they were apart and never saw or spoke? since when does that ever happen. Destined to fail unless a clean slate sometime in the future.

Angel didnt deserve any I Love You's, that would have been rediculous and not believable for even a moment, actually that kiss they shared was rediculous. Who does that? i dont even believe buffy does or would, that was purely to stir it up and have us guessing and buzzing. That was totally a cliffhanger so to speak, a "who will die moment" or what will spike do now and has she chosen angel, wtf is going on here. And as predicted we run around like chickens who has had their heads lobbed off.

Think I got the sitch on Xander/Buffy:

Nick Brendon said that Joss had originally intended for Buffy and Xander to be together in Season 7. He changed his mind about the B/X relationship in Season 7 because "Buffy has always wanted what was unattainable". (Nashville Convention)

So by "unattainable" he means Spike? Interesting. When do you think he started planning S7!Xander/Buffy (before S6, during S6, after S6?) and when do you think he changed his mind?

One thing I know for sure: He must've changed his mind before S7 started, considering "She'll tell you. Someday she'll tell you" took place as early as the fourth episode.

IMDB also mentions this:

According to Nicholas Brendon, he and Sarah Michelle Gellar proposed a storyline for Season 7 where Xander and Buffy get together romantically. Their idea was shot down, and they continued with the Buffy-Spike relationship.

Well...at that point, I think that Xander would've been more unattainable than Spike, but okay.  Furthermore, if Joss contemplated a Bander in s6, it wouldn't have made much sense cause he still loved Anya.  Maybe it was during "Entropy," but then that also wouldn't make sense because that made Xander not only disgusted at Anya, but even more so at Buffy, cause he had her on such an incredibly high pedestal, and knowing that she lowered herself to a demon, a soulless one at that who was Spike who he loathes, made him feel sick ot his stomach.  Maybe it would have occurred shortly after the bathroom scene in SR, and the bonding during Tara's death and Willow's insanity trying to kill everyone rampage, but then he (Joss) remembered "hey, wait- Spike's getting that soul for his lady...can't have him come home to his girl and she's with Everyday Man, cause gosh, that would suck," or something like that.

Just speculation :P

Personally, I think Bander makes even less sense than Bangel. I'm never met anyone who's thought of a person as a brother for seven or eight years than suddenly decides they're a romantic prospect. No, and Xander's cross was based mostly on physical attraction, I don't think he could ever be romantically in love with her.

I was reading alot of the interviews for Angel: After the Fall from Brian Lynch and Joss Whedon and in one of them it did say that there would be some sort of female interest for Spike, who would be in Spike: Shadow Puppets as well...

Who knows, I hope they just pull it off right.

DN

Um, no? The only character from Spike: Shadow Puppets who will be appearing in AtS is that fish-like guy, and Brian Lynch has hinted that the lady in the Issue 2 cover who will be important in Spike's arc is not a love interest.

So by "unattainable" he means Spike? Interesting.

Am I the only one whose brain immediately went to the "you're the one" speech in Touched, which starts out with Buffy and Spike talking about her being unattainable?

He must've changed his mind before S7 started, considering "She'll tell you. Someday she'll tell you" took place as early as the fourth episode.

It must have been before most of season 6, too, because wasn't the whole point of the soul that Spike had to get it to be worthy of Buffy? In other words, so she could justify having feelings for him. That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense if Buffy was going to be with Xander. 

Personally, I never saw any hints that Buffy and Xander were going to get together later in the series. It could have been a possibility in season 4, before Xander/Anya and Buffy/Riley got together. But any time after that - there would've had to be some major changes in order for it to make sense.

It's entirely possible that Nicky was confused, his quote was misunderstood, or he was just wrong about Joss' plan. It wouldn't be the first time an actor has been mistaken about Joss' intentions.

Yeah, but Sarah said the same.

No, Sarah said that she and Nicky pitched the Bander idea, and Joss shot it down. That's completely different from Joss planning to do Bander in season 7 and then changing his mind.

I was talking abotu the recent rumors about bander in the comics, she said she thinks that Bander was where Joss was planning to go from the beginning.

It may have been where he planned to go in the beginning, but obviously, things change. Spike wasn't even conceived of in the beginning. Bander may be where Joss is planning to go with the comics. But I don't know of anyone else who's said Joss was planning to do Bander in season 7, and that's what I was referring to.

On the subject of Spangel, a quote from David:

“I would have liked to see the relationship between Angel and Spike explored more. They have so much chemistry and history together.”
-David Boreanaz, when asked what he regrets most about not having a sixth season, convention: Chicago 2004.

I don't read the Buffy season eight comics and have no desire to. I might read Angel: After the Fall, because of the fact that I go where Spike goes. The only way I'll be reading the Buffy comics is if something Spuffy happens, or even an interaction between them.

But, I wouldn't mind Spike getting a new love interest, as much as I love Spuffy, because I think he deserves to be happy.

After 3+ seasons (6 seasons, if you take into account the retconning) of watching Spike pursue that happiness with Buffy, and evolving into a better person for her sake alone, I wouldn't want him to end up with anyone else. Well, except Angel, because they have crazy chemistry and I'd like to see the Bangels' reaction. :P

(I don't think David meant romantic chemistry there. Didn't he feel uncomfortable with the hand-holding scene? I remember reading something like that. And James was bothered by the implication that his character had had a one-night stand with Angel. LOL, James.)

Did he evolve into a better person for her sake alone?  He certainly began the change for her.  But if it was always and only about her, then you are basically saying what a lot of Spike-detracters say -- all his dramatic changes are not really so impressive if it's all about a girl for him.  But fortunately as season 7 makes clear, Spike wants to do the right thing even though he doesn't expect to get the girl.  And then we get the exclamation point of AtS 5 where Spike explicitly says *he* wants to be a champion -- not for the sake of anybody else, but just because he wants to. 

Ironically, I think a healthy Spuffy relationship is only possible if it is, in fact, true that Spike could be happy with someone else.   It was too soon for that in AtS 5 -- but I think Spike was getting there.

I disagree on the latter point, but that might just be because I don't think any relationship we get in comic form could possibly compare to what Mutant Enemy, James and Sarah gave us. (James's "God, this is so powerful, I'm gonna cry" about Spike/Buffy comes to mind.)

I think I remember a quote James said about Spike and Angel going something like, "Spike and Angel? Hell yeah, lots of times."

Haven't heard about that... I was referring to this:

The next question wanted to find out the most ridiculous thing James had been asked to do in character in any show, and why. James got embarrassed for a moment...

"That is a tall order, that one... Intimate that I'd slept with Angel was kinda harsh..." (Cheers and hollering) "That's not what I thought those two -- I knew that my character was infatuated with Angel, but to take it to that level, I just... I don't know."

But then, James changes his mind every week, so I wouldn't be surprised if he said the phrase you quoted, too.

Well, you are right about him changing his mind often, because he's done that on the issuse of Spuffy. I know the one I mention isn't the only quote he said about Spike and Angel and their past relationship, but I can also see him changing his mind and being uncomfortable about it.

Yeah, he changes his mind about Spuffy all the time, so I wouldn't put it beyond him to do the same about Spangel. *shrugs*

I think that Joss is not going to end the comics with Spuffy or Bangel. I think he might just leave it open, for the fans to believe whatever they want. He's going to string the Spuffy and Bangel people along, because he knows they make up most of his fan base.

I also don't think he wants it to end up like Dawson's Creek, where Buffy choosing Spike (him being her equal who she can see in sexual/romantic relationship) over Angel (who's her pure and innocent love but not sexually).

The idea of a Angel/Buffy/Spike ending is great, but it's probably not going to happen. But than again, who knows. Only Joss knows what he wants to do.

I think I remember reading that Brian Lynch said one time that if a person was so inclined that Spike and Angel had great sexual chemistry together.

I can kinda see a hint of Bander in the first ten minutes or so of Lessons.  It seems like Buffy, Xander, and Dawn were a little family unit during the summer between 6 and 7.  What really bugs me about Bander in season 8 is that I thought Dawn and Xander were developing feelings for one another.  I mean, does Buffy have to take all the guys Dawn crushes on?

Dawn doesn't seem to have feelings for Xander in the comics, though. And I don't think it's reasonable that Buffy's not allowed to date someone Dawn no longer has feelings for. Dawn was dating a guy she met (presumably) at college, until she slept with him and turned giant-sized, and her one scene with Xander seems mostly brother/sistery.

I don't think there is any threat to feminism there. Buffy IS supernatural, after all, and pairing her with Spike is by no means a threat to her female power, as he is not one to treat her like a damsel in distress. If anything, he is her equal. A 'normal' guy wouldn't be able to hold his own with her (especially in bed) and that was more than evident in her relationship with Riley (imagine the insecurities that big potato would have if he wasn't even Initiative-enhanced) 

But what I really wanted to say is that I hate the idea of Bander, and find the possibility of those two ending up together to be insulting to all Spuffy and Bangel fans.

I mean, the guy lied to her about what Willow said when she was fighting Angelus, he kept acting like an a**hole even after Spike had taken care of all of them during the summer Buffy was dead,  he  killed who knows how many  people when he called Sweet, and then what? He gets the  girl???

I like to think Buffy was all about higher values, deeper meanings and the shades of gray, but Bander would be like saying no matter how much of an idiot you may be, you can get the girl!!! this is not about what HE wants, this should be about what Buffy wants, and if she decides that she wants to be with him after all this time it's like she is not even the same character I've known and loved (or cursed, when she was treating Spike like dirt) for all those years!

I mean, the guy lied to her about what Willow said when she was fighting Angelus, he kept acting like an a**hole even after Spike had taken care of all of them during the summer Buffy was dead,  he  killed who knows how many  people when he called Sweet, and then what? He gets the  girl???

Sorry, but there's no way you can convince me that anything Xander did, that the entire body of his sins put together, can even begin to compare to Spike's list of crimes as a vampire. But it's okay for *him* to get the girl? If we can forgive Spike and accept his redemption, why can't we forgive Xander for much less serious things? Honestly, I think some people just want to hate Xander, and ignore everything else.

When does xander ever take responsebility for what hes done?

angelus? sweet?

Its always so conveniently sweept under the rug for whatever reason. Xander always gets "get out of jail free" card because hes an incapable jester. I cant believe the responsibility hes got in the comic, i wouldnt trust him further then i could throw him wich would be just about one foot. Then again we are privy to the fly on the wall view on sertain situations. And now hes got a cool eye-patch too, bastard.

He admits that he summoned Sweet, and that he didn't know what would happen. What exactly should he do to take responsibility? It's not like anything he does will make the people not dead anymore. It was stupid, it was an accident, and it's no worse than the things everyone else on the show has done.

And the lie about what Willow said comes up in season 7. Neither Buffy nor Willow makes a big deal out of it, except for Willow's "I never said that." If it doesn't bother them, then why would it bother us? It's not like none of them have lied before - with much greater consequences. I'm not sure how that even really changed things anyway. The purpose of telling Buffy about the resouling attempt was so that she could stall until Willow got the spell done. But Buffy knew that if Acathla was awakened, she'd have to kill Angel(us) no matter what. Whether she was trying to stall or trying to kill him, Angelus still pulled the sword out, so she didn't have a choice. And when she killed him, she knew he had his soul back, so it didn't matter that Xander didn't tell her.

And as for not trusting Xander... did you see season 7? Buffy trusts Xander with the most important thing in the world to her - Dawn.

What Spike did as a vampire is not forgotten, but he did seek out both his soul and redemption. 

I do not hate Xander, never have, I pity him! I think of him as too little of a man.

As for accepting responsibility with Sweet, he only did so in the end, after lots of people had been killed, when he could have told the others of his involvement since the beginning. And I don't think he was ever sorry about anything he did (only for being caught), with the exception of leaving Anya at the altar, which he did nothing to correct.

He was a bigot, he was immature, and he was a lier. Still I do not hate him, I just don't find him good enough for a woman with spine. Anya was too much for him and so is Buffy!

I think Xander was a much better person than you give him credit for, and I feel like his entire character gets judged based on a couple things he did wrong, which makes him one-dimensional and completely doesn't do justice to the complexity of the character Joss created. But like I said, some people will dislike him no matter what, so there's really no point in arguing.

As a character I don't like or dislike Xander. He could be a very brave and caring man sometimes, and at other times I found him a bigot or a hypocrite. When it came to caring for his friends, and his bravery, and his ability to stand by Buffy when many other's would have run, I find that admirable. But the way he sometimes treated Spike or Angel, or the way he sometimes tried to make decisions for other people I didn't like. And the way he treated Anya at the last end of season six.

My problem with Xander really isn't Xander's fault.  It's just that we never got a story focused on his growth, on him dealing with and overcoming his limitations.  That's the context in which the show's willingness to let the Sweet thing drop without comment hurts his story.  Compare how Faith's accidental killing of the assistant mayor in the line of duty was a Big Deal -- one in which her refusal to take responsibility for it was the beginning of her spiral into being a dark slayer.  Xander makes a mistake that kills many more people and we all shrug and move on.  In the end it's a disservice to the character.  Faith gets held more accountable, but the result is that she gets a big arc.  The story they are telling about her now in the comics is riveting.  Xander, by contrast, is dull, dull, dull.  And because dull, not a fit partner for Buffy -- at least not dramatically speaking.

I don't hate Xander.  I just feel that if there was a time for him in Buffy, it would have been at the beginning of s4.  Now, it would just seem wrong.  True, canon wise we missed a year, but I can't see them realistically being beyond a brother/sister relationship. 

Now, as for the character specifically...He wasn't so bad.  Taking into account that he was only 22 when we last see him (it is young--not knocking people my age, but my god are some of them so damned immature), and Joe Normal the entire series--no weird drugs to pump him up, magics or super powers of any kind ever, and the fact that yes, he came from a broken home, low self esteem for quite awhile, and the people around him bringing up his short comings every so often, it is not a wonder to me why he was sometimes bitter.  The whole Sweet thing--it was clear (to me) that once he made the connection of the "singing and the dancing with the burning and the dying," that he was afraid of getting in trouble.  He realizes it in fact in the presence of Giles, the father figure, and does not admit to his role in Sweet coming to Sunnydale until Dawn is in danger of being dragged to a hell dimension to be a demon's queen.

Let's see--the whole Spike thing...I think the fact that he kind of admired a guy he hated sums that up.  Spike has always left Xander twisted in conflict and inner turmoil.  I think he wanted to like him, and some of the time, he did, and treated Spike fairly.  I think the caustic remark he made to Spike in the beginning of "Afterlife" was totally OOC, but looking over s6 overall, this does not come as a surpise.  Wanting to stake him after the Anya incident was reasonable--to actually *see* such an incident would make any guy wanna kick some ass, whether he's still with the girl or not.  The fact that Spike is a vampire would make him feel less guilt about actually killing him.

Okay--this is really long, so I'll stop now.

Personally, I don't care who brought Sweet down to Sunnydale, especially since it seems illogical that any of the Scoobies would have. The only thing I can think is that Xander may have pulled one of his speaking Latin in front of the book moments and accidentally cast the spell -thus being a potential reason why he didn't realize what had happened right away (and allowed him to be ignorant of and upset by the reality of the spell). I think Xander didn't make the connection right away, seeing how much he was confused about what happened in the beginning of the episode as well as urging Giles to find what causes these people to die.

I think the fact that he kind of admired a guy he hated sums that up.  Spike has always left Xander twisted in conflict and inner turmoil.  I think he wanted to like him, and some of the time, he did, and treated Spike fairly.

Yep. I've said something similar before... Xander and Spike have a very interesting relationship (friendship, not slashy), and if I could ever get my ass in gear and write the s7 Xander/Spike friendship fic I thought about, I'd explore it more. 

The only thing I can think is that Xander may have pulled one of his speaking Latin in front of the book moments and accidentally cast the spell -thus being a potential reason why he didn't realize what had happened right away (and allowed him to be ignorant of and upset by the reality of the spell).

When he admits it was him, Xander says he didn't know what would happen, he just thought there would be singing and dancing and stuff. So, it sounds like he picked the spell on purpose (because he wanted them to have a "happy ending"), not knowing about the flamey death part. Considering the miserable state everyone was in at that point, it's not that odd for him to want something that would cheer them all up - and it's certainly no more than Willow has done in the past, attempting to manipulate people's emotions with her spells. I think the part he's in denial about is that the same spell that caused the happy singing is also causing the flamey deaths.

Also, regarding the comparison between Faith and Xander... I think the difference is that Faith had already been established as being somewhat dark - she gets off on slaying, she's somewhat reckless, and all it takes is one accidental killing to tip her scales completely toward her darker side. I don't think we've ever really seen that with Xander. For all his personal history and hardships, he's never been *dark*. We got a small taste of it in season 1, but that was a possession, and we never really saw it again. Of all the Scoobies in season 6 who would "turn evil," Xander seems like one of the least likely (second probably only to Tara, maybe Dawn). A jerk or an asshole at times, sure, but not actually evil, and that's why his mistake doesn't really send him down a dark path the way Faith's does. Also, I think there's a personal aspect to it - Faith actually killed a man with her own hands, Xander didn't. There's a rush of power/adrenaline that comes with killing someone that Xander didn't get, since the actual killing was a step removed. I think that has an impact, too, on the likelihood to continue down that path.

E--now that you've brought it up, you have to write it now :P

Um, there's a lot of people you can compare Faith to, and Xander is definitely not one of them.  Faith was on the opposite end of the spectrum of Angel in s3--she got a taste of darkness, and found herself wanting to guzzle the whole bottle while Angel got a taste of the light, and made a career out of it so that one day, he could make it permanent or whatever. 

Or Buffy and Faith--they were both kind of stuck on themselves in the sense that one was all "Do what I say cause I'm the slayer," while the latter was all "I'll do what I want cause I'm the slayer."

And the easy comparison of Spike and Faith, which is really self explanatory.  However, I think they'd make an awful couple, cause ultimately, they'd be bad influences on each other.  Unless it's s7 Faith, maybe, cause she was in a different place then (especially after the whole almost got killed by Angelus thing).

I've been trying to write it, Scarlet, but it just wouldn't come! I must have started it at least 3 different times, and scrapped it every time. I was in a phase where everything I wrote came out crappy, though, and I think I'm out of it now (I guess I'll find out when Cat betas my new stuff... :)) so maybe I'll give it another try.

This is an argument to not treat the two incidents in exactly the same way.  But it's not an argument for why the two incidents were treated totally differently.  In season 3, the concerns were phrased as if just the fact of killing a human changes someone, and that there's something morally wrong with Faith for not showing that the accident bothers her.  Those things apply to Xander as well -- so there should have been *some* reaction to his complete lack of concern for the people who died as a result of his action, even if the fact that his case was different in other ways is a reason why they shouldn't have reacted exactly the same.

The fact that the issue doesn't surface *at all* gives the people who want to use this against Xander (and the Scoobies) some ground to stand on.  It looks hypocritical.

For me, the real reason this was a non-issue isn't because the writers use different moral standards for judging their favorite characters.  Rather, it's because Sweet was a plot device to get the musical in swing, and they wanted the stupid butt monkey joke -- and on some level the deaths didn't "really" happen.  And this is the main reason why I don't count this incident against Xander.  The whole thing was plot-driven, not character-driven.  An example of a place where the two come apart, a lapse in the quality of writing (which ideally should have both plot and character intertwined in everything.)

just the fact of killing a human changes someone

I think the difference, though, is what I pointed out earlier - that Xander didn't actually kill someone himself. *That's* what changes a person. *That's* what makes it so wrong to not be bothered by it. There are other instances of "accidental deaths" indirectly caused by one of the gang, and they're not held responsible or expected to feel guilty. For example, Joyce was never held responsible for the death of her friend (and anyone else who was killed by the zombies) when she got that mask, and Willow and Anya were never held responsible for all the damage done by Olaf (destroying the Bronze definitely caused injuries, and probably some deaths). 

And really, like I said, what is there to do in these situations? They can't change what happened. It was a mistake, and they know not to do it again (unlike Faith). What more can we expect besides an admission of fault? I think the reason there's not a lot of character development here is because there's not much character to develop. Maybe if these were different people, an accidental death would have a huge impact. But we're talking about people who experience death every day, and every action they make can mean that someone lives or dies. So, unless it fundamentally changes a person, death is not worth dwelling on.

OK -- let's grant that he didn't directly kill the people.  It's still the case that his action led to many deaths.  Yes, he is someone who experiences death every day -- someone who is dedicated to trying to stop it.  But that just makes his utter unconcern about it that much more bizarre.  He lives to prevent deaths, yet here he caused them.  However inadvertently.  Buffy wears a hair shirt whenever people die, if she thinks she could have prevented it.  Xander here not only failed to prevent -- he actively caused.  By the standards of the 'verse he should at least feel bad about it, and he should apologize for it.  We don't get an admission of fault -- at least not one that connects his foolishness with the fact that several people died.  At a minimum he violates their code for not being callous about loss of human life.

In addition, because he fights with the Scoobies, he knows perfectly well that demons are dangerous to summon.  So he's more than just foolish in doing this.  To make matters work, he lets the situation go on quite a while before coming clean.  All of these just mean that he is that much further across the line.

I'm guessing you are reacting to those who call Xander a murderer for all of this.  And I agree that such claims are way overstated.  But I think you are overreacting.  If Spike had done this, he would have been harshed on for it quite strongly -- his unconcern about the deaths of people would have been taken as evidence of his evil nature, etc. etc.  Can't you hear Buffy:  "You just sit there like nothing happened.  You can't feel how bad it is that people died because of what you did.  You don't care because you are an evil soulless dead thing.  blah blah blah."  And that's why people do rightly feel that there's something of a double-standard going on here, even if they misarticulate that feeling by calling Xander a murderer.

The real reason to not place stock in the non-reaction is not because it was normal or right.  It's because the deaths were incidental to the plot device Joss was using to get the musical started etc. etc.  Because of that, I don't think he noticed that he had implied that Xander fell well short of the moral standards of the Scoobies.  It was just a writing mistake.

Xander and Spike have a very interesting relationship (friendship, not slashy), and if I could ever get my ass in gear and write the s7 Xander/Spike friendship fic I thought about, I'd explore it more. 

That will be very interesting, I hope you get inspired to write it.

I think the only similarity between Faith and Xander is that they both were raised by awful parents.

Don't you hate it when the writing isn't up to its potenial? Xander summoning Sweet is the reason Once More With Feeling isn't a 100% perfect episode, like Hush and Restless. You know what makes it suck, they didn't need to pin it on anyone. It's Sunnydale. Demons don't need to be summoned to murder.

I'd like to think that Giles yelled at Xander off screen like he had done in Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered.

I'm guessing you are reacting to those who call Xander a murderer for all of this.

Well... sorta. Initially, I was reacting to people who hate Xander, and claim this and one or two other bad things he's done (most of it contained in season 6) as the reason, as though nothing else he's done the entire series matters. Personally, I don't think this one act is enough to write off the character completely. He's complex, he's done good and bad, he's made mistakes and sacrifices, he's been both a hero and an asshole, just like everyone else. In my mind, that makes him way more enjoyable to read, watch, and write than a one-note villain, but like I said, there are people who just don't like Xander, and will never like him.

The other thing I was reacting to was the comparison to Faith. I don't really think it's valid, for the reasons stated above. I think a more appropriate comparison would be the ones I mentioned - Joyce in "Dead Man's Party" or Willow and Anya in "Triangle." Those incidents are also deaths caused by the character's foolishness or carelessness in dealing with magic, and they show pretty much the same lack of concern for human life and absence of apology. I think you're absolutely right about the "plot over character" problem, and I think it's also evident in these other examples. However, if we're trying to make observations and conclusions about a character within the Buffyverse, leaving it at "writer's mistake," while true, isn't very satisfying.

Deus ex machina, guys.  Personally, they could have had Sweet just come to town cause there was some kind of pull with the hellmouth or whatever, or Buffy or Dawn or hell, even Xander, Spike or Giles drew him in, thus avoiding "who summoned the demon who makes some people dance to death? Hmm..."  But whatever, I took the ep for what it was.  Xander made a boo boo, and at least he came clean at the end.  They've all been guilty of putting at least one other person in harm's way inadvertenly.  When I first saw the ep, and Xander raised his hand that he summoned the demon, it was like a "Pfft--of course it was you" moment, and soon after, it didn't even matter (to me). I'm talking seconds soon after.

If one wants to be legit in criticizing Xander's character, then they could bring up his penchant for being overly critical of others he feels are in some shape or form beneath him.  Granted this is probably brought out by his own inadequacies, but at least it would be valid.

However, I must say that "Afterlife" kind of set the stage for people to really start viewing Xander as a dick, IMHO.  People weren't feeling Xander in s6, and I think that's why he was given such an important role in saving the world, and also because they couldn't have it just be Giles (it'd screw up their whole "growing up" theme if all it takes is for daddy to fix it...).

I think Xander in season six was clearly a jerk toward Spike, which I'm still trying to find a reasonable explanation for seeing as he was getting along nicely with Spike by the end of season five, as well as leaving Anya at the altar. But he had his good moments, he helped save Buffy in Gone and Normal Again, he took Dawn to school every day, he sided with Anya against Willow (some complain that Xander put Buffy and Willow above Anya and the scene in Older and Far Away shows the opposite), he was very good in his job, he made peace with Buffy and called himself an ass for not understanding why she went to Spike, he felt bad for Spike because he reminded him of Xander, he saved the world... I'm sure there are more examples but I'm too tired to type more...

 I think you're absolutely right about the "plot over character" problem, and I think it's also evident in these other examples. However, if we're trying to make observations and conclusions about a character within the Buffyverse, leaving it at "writer's mistake," while true, isn't very satisfying.

No, it's not very satisfying.  Maybe we could say this:  Joyce's mistake is easier to write-off cause she's not in-the-loop on magic and stuff.  Willow's mistake really isn't written off -- it's part and parcel of the portrait of her as someone who does NOT care about the effects of magic on other people.  The Scoobies' failure to hold Willow accountable here was part of what enabled her to continue her fall.  The incident here with Xander, showing the same non-reaction, reminds us that the Scoobies, who are very good at holding outsiders (Spike, Faith) accountable for their moral failings are using a different standard for themselves.  In the case of Xander, this isn't devastating.  But it already has been devastating in the case of Willow.  I just can't bring myself to believe that the writers really meant to portray the Scoobies this way.  I'd like to. But I tend to think that the writers own double-standard (always question Spike and Faith; always assume the best of the Scoobies) blinded them to the hypocrisy they were portraying.  I go back and forth on this a lot.  When I think BtVS is great, it's because I think the writers really did want to call the heroes into question as deeply as my suggested reading would.  But then I think of the happy ending of the Chosen, and I think the writers really didn't get how dark they'd written their own characters.

About Faith, the Scoobys tried to help her out, remember? I recall Buffy, Xander and Angel's attempts to comfort her and help her out, but SHE chose to brush off the helping hands. She went out and betrayed the Scoobys trust when they had welcomed her back with opened arms. I don't blame them if they found it hard to trust Faith again after everything she had done to them.

I dunno about Faith--she was already morally ambiguous before she accidentally killed Allan.  If she hadn't, Buffy would have just followed her blindly, and wholly accepted Faith's philosophy of "Want. Take. Have."  That can only last so long before it goes to hell.  Cause hey, stealing from stores and assaulting police officers aren't exactly things a hero would do.  But then again, no one, including Buffy, said "No, Faith--Bad!" until someone ended up dead.  I think Wesley's unfortunate intervention most certainly didn't help things, but any way you cut it, you're right--Faith made a choice. 

When I think of it, you can't really use the whole "Oh, she was insecure cause she couldn't measure up to Buffy" bit, cause at first, it wasn't true.  Everyone was kind of enthralled by her, and initially gave Buffy the brush off, cause she seemed like the lame slayer by comparison.  She was accepted by the Scoobies, as well as Joyce, so her whole reason for turning into the Bad Seed was...I am not sure.

When I think of it, you can't really use the whole "Oh, she was insecure cause she couldn't measure up to Buffy" bit, cause at first, it wasn't true. 

I think Faith's insecurity in general played into her behavior, but I think Buffy is an excuse/scapegoat for Faith. Given Faith's implied background, she's pretty insecure - there's no one she can trust, she's never felt loved, she's always been abandoned by people she cared about. Coming to Sunnydale, she found everything she wanted - friends who hung on her every word, a surrogate family (Joyce) who cared for her, and even a sister who understands what it's like to be the Slayer and who buys into her carefree, "want take have" lifestyle (which was completely a front for her insecurity). But all that starts to collapse - the Scoobies become less enamored with her when she's no longer the new girl in town, her relationship with Buffy starts to show some sibling rivalry, and as she gets more reckless, she starts sensing disapproval from Giles and Wesley. The more Faith feels she's not getting the attention she wants/needs, the more she acts out. When she gets the negative reactions after killing a person, she feels everyone has turned on her (just like they always do - people abandon her and break her trust). I think some if it may even be anticipated - she *knows* she's going to get in trouble, and she knows that means her new friends will abandon her (which is why she denies responsibility). It's that feeling that she's being rejected that leads her to both reject the Scoobies' attempts to help, and to seek out validation from someone who approves of her just as she is, the Mayor. Really, Faith caused her own problems, but it's so much easier and more comforting to play the victim, and so she blames it on Buffy, and how she could never measure up, and Buffy got everything Faith wanted. But in fact, Faith was setting herself up for a fall before she even came to Sunnydale. Joining up with Buffy and the gang might have been a chance for her to turn things around, but she didn't take it.

 But in fact, Faith was setting herself up for a fall before she even came to Sunnydale. Joining up with Buffy and the gang might have been a chance for her to turn things around, but she didn't take it.

Exactly. Though I find it rather more tragic than anything else.  She sees herself one way, and then unconsciously acts in a way to get that view reinforced.  Imprisoned by her past.  But at the end of the day she doesn't make it an excuse.  I love that she finally stops making excuses and takes responsibility.  Big moment for her.

The comics are interesting in this regard.  She still has the pattern of setting herself up to feel like an outsider.  But she doesn't follow it up with lashing out at the world.  Can't wait for the next issue.  Her story is one of my favorites.

I think one of the major problems that people have with Xander ,Willow and Buffy is thier problem with admitting guilt or remorse for any bad action on thier parts. Xander pretends things don't happen, the most guilt we really see from Willow is cookie baking (she blamed the magic for a lot of things) , and Buffy oddly enough takes responsibility for things that aren't her fault (like Xander's eye) and doesn't for things she is responsible for (even when talking to Holden she puts her bad behavior off on Spike).

And In OMWF , Xander did ask Giles after the first death if the singing and dancing had anythign to do with it but still didn't admit he caused the spell. It would've been a better plot device (assuming they went with the kidnapping Dawn part) to have the amulet activated by a random act like blood (or some other substance) getting on it or it being worn by a virgin (Dawn) .

Xander really didn't need anymore points against his character especially considering the upcoming bride abandoment and the way he acted like a complete dick to Spike when Spike left Buffy's house after she was brought back.

If they had to have Xander leave Anya at the altar though , it would've have been better for his character development if he had told her himself .He could have told her his fears of becoming like his father and said he'd already seen signs that he was headed that way and that she deserved someone who treated her better. Instead he walked out leaving her to deal with his drunken relatives and her guests. And then he wants to come back and ask her to date. The only way that them going back to dating would work is if the above scenario happened and he told her he wanted to still be with her but before making a lifetime commitment  he wanted to become a better person.

And even if Anya tried to talk him out of backing out he could still go out to where the ceremony was being held and announce the wedding was off and tell the people to go to the reception because it was paid for .

At the very least he could've wrote her a letter and asked someone trustworthy to give it to Anya .

Both those would've been a mature response and character developing.

I don't think a letter would be the best way to do it, it would show him as a coward. Best thing is he tells her exactly what he saw. He had told her that it wasn't about her, it wasn'ts her that he was hating (which implies it was him), and the thing is, he wasn't in a state where he can think rationally, he just saw his worst nightmare a few minutes ago, it would be illogical for him to be all confident again once he knew it wasn't real. We're talking Xander, the most human/real character of them all. He can't bounce from troubled to secure just because Anya told him the visions were not real.

As for Buffy, Xander and Willow taking remorse, I think they do. Buffy always beats herself for things going badly if it was her fault or not. Xander beats himself for how he had treated Anya in Hell's Bells. Willow beats herself for killing and turning against her friends. All of them had moments where they sat down in misery think why they were stupid, all of them had admitted their faults in some point in the series. It still baffles me when I hear that Buffy, Xander and Willow never admitted their mistakes just because we saw one or two incidents where they didn't.

The award for the least person who never admitted her faults goes to Anya, not the core four.  

Um...besides incidents in which Buffy feels responsible for a human being's death (Alan Finch, Katrina Silber), when does she feel remorseful about anything?  She's done some unsavory things, and didn't seem remorseful to me.  Honestly, nothing is coming to mind.  Even when she lead the potentials into that death trap at the vineyard, against everyone else's advisement, she doesn't apologize for it (even if the scythe was there, her planning was really crappy.  We didn't get an apology speech in that episode).

Buffy certainly didn't seem to feel remorse over the terrible abuse she inflicted on Spike (and I'm not just talking about "Dead Things"). Spike spent the entire seventh season apologizing for the attempted rape, and we saw genuine feelings of guilt from him. Buffy? She still seemed bent on excusing it because he didn't have a soul then.

Let the flames begin. :P

No flames here--I agree 100% :nod:  Buffy seemed pretty much hung up on Buffy.  It was that whole superiority complex.

Come on now. Buffy feels twice more guilty about what she did and didn't do. You didn't think she felt guilty over what happened in Dirty Girls? She was looking at a picture of Xander, touching his face, in a sad guilty expression. She was quiet and ashamed over her plan. Everybody felt bad for her. Even Kennedy who said sorry for badmouthing Buffy before her. It's not Buffy's place to say sorry, she's the leader and she's going to make mistakes. Being kicked out was a lesson enough for her, anyway.

As for Spike, she was amazing toward him in season seven which is remarkable considering the attempted rape last year. She had pushed what he had done aside and helped him throughout the season to become a better man. That was better than any apology she would tell him.

Guilt and saying "Sorry!" are different than remorse, though. A child is sorry when it's punished because they got caught. They feel guilty because they now have consequences when they knew they shouldn't do it in the first place. Does it keep them from doing it again? Most likely not.

Remorse means you have sworn inside yourself to never do that thing again, because it's eating at you that you did it (and most likely caused someone pain). And remorse also means that you want to make amends - verbally and physically. It leads to repentance - making a 180 from the behavior you were doing.

We saw lots of "sorry", but it took way too much and too long to get a shread of "remorse".

CM

It's not Buffy's place to say sorry, she's the leader and she's going to make mistakes...As for Spike, she was amazing toward him in season seven which is remarkable considering the attempted rape last year. She had pushed what he had done aside and helped him throughout the season to become a better man. That was better than any apology she would tell him.

Yeah, okay, but what about all that transpired *before* "Seeing Red?"  When did she ever feel guilt, remorse, or even sorry for the things that she had done to him?  Not once, and just cause you're the leader doesn't mean that you get a pass on owning up to your mistakes.  If you can't do that--if you can't be a man or be a woman about it admit that you f-ed up, regardless if people are tip toeing around you cause they assume that you feel bad about it, then you shouldn't be a leader.  Walking around all "woe is me," and making looks and having others give you sympathy, even if it is temporary, does not exempt you from the fact that you should own up to the huge mistake you made which lost lives. 

And yeah, she forgave Spike for his one error that year.  How many times did he forgive her when she didn't deserve or earn it?

And as for CM's comment, if she truly felt remorse, her plan of action, pre getting kicked out of her own house (which made no sense, but she did deserve it), showed that she could not have been all that remorseful.  Her plan was to just barge back in.  That does not sound rational to me, even if she was right.  She was only "sorry" so that others would feel sorry for her too.

*steps off soap box*

*high five's Scarlet*

When I see someone consistantly accepted in a leadership position, I can't help thinking of the saying "A leader should be above reproach". IOW, you have to be on your best, but when you DO mess up, and you will, you still have to lead and be the first to admit where you went wrong. That's how you maintain respect. Inspire the willingness to follow you into hell, don't just command it.

CM

CM and Scarlet Ibis, you are now my heroes. :P

Honestly, I don't think there is anything I can add, except that I think both of you are entirely right.

Yeah, okay, but what about all that transpired *before* "Seeing Red?"  When did she ever feel guilt, remorse, or even sorry for the things that she had done to him?

Buffy: The last guy I was with, it got really... I behaved like a monster, treated him like...

Thanks for the quote, Enisy, I'd love to say that if Buffy didn't feel guilt or cared about Spike, she wouldn't have chosen him over her friends in season seven. She slammed the door on Giles' face for Spike. That's a huge thing in my book.

I don't think she chose him over her friends. More than anything, the Giles incident had to do with her choosing her own will over her father's, instead of having him "Standing in the Way". But yeah, she definitely cared about Spike, and she definitely regretted the way she treated him in Season 6, as indicated by the above quote.

You're absolutely right, she did say that....

To a complete stranger. If she was so remorseful as you say, why didnt she tell that to Spike. She never showed true remorse for what she did to him prior to season seven. She never apologized to Spike, I don't blame him for not believing she loved him. She'd been a complete bitch to him the year prior. He messed up with the AR thing, supposing you actually looked at it as AR. She beat him, blew up his crib, then after he gets his soul so he could give her what she deserves, it's not good enough for her, he needed to be more like the old self that she beat down numerous times. She waited to he was burning up before actually admitting that she loved him, supposing she really did.

So how was she remorseful again? By apologizing to some stranger who happened to be some guy she knew in High School. Or let me guess, when she gave him the "I'm not ready for you to not be here" speech, or maybe it was during the "I believe in you speech."

There was no real remorse for her, just a bunch of sorry and apologetic looks.

Just my opinion...

Buffy has been emotionally guarded a lot of the time since Angel, and most of the time since her resurrection. "Buffy doesn't give a lot," Jane Espenson said. "She takes it all in and she has her deep feelings but she doesn't open up to people". She opened up to Holden because he was a complete stranger, someone who wouldn't judge her then, and someone she wouldn't have to face later (since she was planning on killing him). She apologized to Spike in her own way, by "coddling" him, to use Spike's term.

And Buffy wasn't the only one who messed up in Season 6. I think Steven DeKnight said it best with this quote:

Interviewer: Are the writers aware that Spike is coming off more sympathetically than Buffy this season?
Steven DeKnight: Yeeeeees. I will go firmly with yeeeees on that one. And you know, we go back and forth on that, 'cause yeah, she mistreated him, but he also as much as he was being a nice guy sometimes, he was not such a nice guy other times. I mean, in Dead Things, they say, "Oh, well, you know, he was going to stop her from going to the police when it wasn't really her!" -- he didn't know it wasn't really her. And he wasn't stopping her because he wanted to save her -- he wanted to save her for himself.
Interviewer: It's a very possessive love.
Steven DeKnight: It is a very possessive love.
Interviewer: It doesn't make it any less real, it's real to him.
Steven DeKnight: And does he do great heroic things for her? Yes. But, you know, he's doing it for her.
Interviewer: Right, and that's the big question, how good of a person is he if he's only doing things for his own personal gain?
Steven DeKnight: Right. And back in 13 in Dead Things, in the infamous balcony scene, you really also see he is trying to control her, he's trying to separate her from her friends, so as much as you see the puppy-dog look, he's also not playing fair.

And that's not even counting the attempted rape.

She opened up to Holden because he was a complete stranger

It's always easier to admit your mistakes to a stranger (or even just a non-involved friend) than it is to say you're sorry to someone you've wronged. Especially for someone like Buffy, who never opens up to people, and hates to show weakness or vulnerability. 

I don't think the fact that she didn't apologize to Spike's face (that we saw) means she wasn't sorry or didn't feel remorse. It's just expressed a different way. Maybe it's not a satisfying way for Spike or for some of the viewers, but that doesn't mean she didn't feel it.

I'm not saying that she's not sorry E, but besides the oh so inspiring speeches in S7, when was Buffy really remorseful to what she did to Spike since his admittance at being in love with her. And okay, maybe she's emotionally guarded but so was Spike, after all her rejections in S5, her abuse in S6, his attempted rape in SR, he still apologized, even cried for her in Beneath You. Spike had his insecurities too, ie: he was afraid of how he measured up to Angel/us.  He'd been with Dru for a hundred years and the instant Daddy shows up shes screwing him senseless. Not too mention what Buffy felt for Angel.  To stay on topic, all in all, he loved her enough to get a soul and try to make things right. He pretty much condemned himself to self hatred and guilt forever while what did she do to make up for what she did, "coddle him".

Maybe she was remorseful, who knows. Maybe she might even be a bit remorseful about Faith. Sure didn't seem like it.

And about the interview that Steven DeKnight did, to me it's very unfair to say that the things that Spike did in S6 were solely motivated by her. Cuz he could of left Dawn to fend for herself since Buffy was dead and he tried to be good for himself even before the soul, he gave her all the "You belong in the darkness with me." rubbish since he was trying to maintain the messed up relationship they already had, it's not like the Scoobies gave Spike a chance to be in the light. Just my opinion, for what it's worth.

I agree with Daniel.  The fact of the matter is, she never once expressed that remorse to the person who deserved to hear it.  Oh right...Spike's not a person.  At her birthday party, she doesn't even flinch  at the "What are you gonna do?  Beat me up again?" statement.  Her biggest concern was Spike annoying her friends or making caustic remarks at dainty Richard.  Hell in the previous ep, she begs Tara to not forgive her--for (god forbid) having enjoyable sex with Spike.  WTF?  That was just...anyway.

Buffy has been emotionally guarded a lot of the time since Angel, and most of the time since her resurrection. "Buffy doesn't give a lot," Jane Espenson said. "She takes it all in and she has her deep feelings but she doesn't open up to people".

You would think that between Spike and Buffy, he'd have more issues than she ever did as far as emotions, and yet he is the one who is emotionally available.  In spite of the horrendous ending with his mom, constantly vying for Dru's affections, and never 100% getting it, and her, no less. Always the outsider, no matter what he does.  And okay, Buffy sent the man she loved to hell.  But you know what?  He came back.  That was resolved, IMHO.  Okay, he dumped her.  Um, so?  I only say that because she was all like "hurry up and get over Oz, Will," which is funny because I think Oz and Willow were together longer, and Willow definitely had more of an attachment to Oz (just physiologically alone, since they were able to express their feelings physically tons more times than Buffy and Angel ever did, and their being together was a happier, and therefore, more attached of a couple).  So if it's good enough for Willow, why not for Buffy?  Why can't she just suck it up like her friend?  Willow was able to open herself up to a woman, for crying out loud. 

I just feel the whole "Angel left me" excuse is bloody lame.

and the interview...

Steven DeKnight: Yeeeeees. I will go firmly with yeeeees on that one. And you know, we go back and forth on that, 'cause yeah, she mistreated him, but he also as much as he was being a nice guy sometimes, he was not such a nice guy other times. I mean, in Dead Things, they say, "Oh, well, you know, he was going to stop her from going to the police when it wasn't really her!" -- he didn't know it wasn't really her. And he wasn't stopping her because he wanted to save her -- he wanted to save her for himself.
Interviewer: It's a very possessive love.
Steven DeKnight: It is a very possessive love.

Yes--it's possessive when she was the one with the power in the relationship.  And you know what?  Spike was right.  What good is Buffy going to do in prison?  That whole thing was just more about her wanting to flaggelate herself cause she wasn't in heaven.

Steven DeKnight: And does he do great heroic things for her? Yes. But, you know, he's doing it for her.
Interviewer: Right, and that's the big question, how good of a person is he if he's only doing things for his own personal gain?

Um--wrong again.  He was doing all of that heroic business when she was like five months in the ground, and as far as he knew, never coming back.  Or helping Dawn with the ressurection spell--he didn't want Buffy to know anything about that.  I think it's wrong to say that every good thing he ever did only had to do with what Buffy would think of him.  He's helped her friends and her sister when she wasn't around to see it.  He genuinely cared for (some of) them.

Steven DeKnight: Right. And back in 13 in Dead Things, in the infamous balcony scene, you really also see he is trying to control her, he's trying to separate her from her friends, so as much as you see the puppy-dog look, he's also not playing fair.

Still bloody wrong.  Buffy *already* separated herself from her friends--he didn't drag her ass up there.  In fact, didn't Xander have to coax her to go in the first place?  Spike is nothing but an easy scapegoat here.  Once again--Spike did not have the power.  She could've walked away.  The fact of the matter is, she was exactly where she wanted to be.  Also, *she* was the one that demanded they keep it a secret.  *She* was the one who wanted to be in the dark.  *She* was the one who threatened bodily harm should the truth come to light.  So, Spike says fine, come stay in the dark with me (cause that's where she wanted to be anyway).  Do you really think he would've told her no if she said "Hey, let's go on a real date to the Bronze or something.  Or do a double date with Anya and Xander."  Come on...it's what he wanted.

And that's not even counting the attempted rape.

Yeah--that term is a little too black and white for me in this fictitious scenario, but it's been discussed in excess on other threads, so never mind.

Scarlet Ibis, it's like you read my mind! My thoughts on the subject are exactly the same!

I think doing something to help a person is much better apology than a few words like "Sorry". Without Buffy's help, without Buffy stating more than once that she believed in Spike, without Buffy standing up to Giles and Wood for Spike, Spike wouldn't have came through, he'd still be some crazy guy living in a basement. Buffy was the reason Spike became a hero in season seven.

I agree with that interview. Spike was cruel to Buffy sometimes, using the situation in his hands to isolate Buffy from her friends and the world so she could be with him. Buffy and Spike were both cruel toward each other in season six, and cruel isn't always about beating someone up. Buffy's hurtful words hurt Spike way more than her beating, as well as Spike's cruel "You came back wrong" and "You belong to the dark with me."

I just feel the whole "Angel left me" excuse is bloody lame.

You obviously missed the second half of my sentence.

Yes--it's possessive when she was the one with the power in the relationship.

She wasn't, not all of the time. Think handcuffs, think balcony scene, think Buffy's "I let him completely take me over". Even Joss said their relationship was characterised by "dominance games".

And you know what?  Spike was right.  What good is Buffy going to do in prison?  That whole thing was just more about her wanting to flaggelate herself cause she wasn't in heaven.

No, it was about right and wrong, concepts that Buffy has devoted her entire life to, and that were completely foreign to Spike.

Um--wrong again.  He was doing all of that heroic business when she was like five months in the ground, and as far as he knew, never coming back.  Or helping Dawn with the ressurection spell--he didn't want Buffy to know anything about that.  I think it's wrong to say that every good thing he ever did only had to do with what Buffy would think of him.  He's helped her friends and her sister when she wasn't around to see it.  He genuinely cared for (some of) them.

Steven DeKnight was referring to Dead Things, and I'm inclined to believe his opinion over yours, since he was the one who, y'know, wrote the episode.

Still bloody wrong.  Buffy *already* separated herself from her friends--he didn't drag her ass up there.

No, he didn't, but he took advantage of her vulnerable position to draw her further away from her friends -- the same friends who he knows are "the reason she's lasted this long" (Fool for Love). Buffy's treatment of Spike in Season 6 was definitely reprehensible, but Spike's emotional manipulation, blackmail and finally attempted rape was also NOT COOL.

And yes, I'll call it attempted rape. Jane Espenson called it attempted rape, David Fury called it attempted rape, Steven DeKnight called it attempted rape, Joss Whedon -- the ultimate authority in the 'verse -- called it attempted rape.

Buffy always confused Spike, because her words never went with her actions. If she'd given him the words (which always meant a lot to him) along with her actions in season 7, then he wouldn't have had a problem believing her "I love you" at all. But she couldn't put her money where her mouth was.

As for the show people? They've proved several times that they're out of touch with how the show looked on our side of things. Maybe the fault is with James' acting, but you can't look at Spike's face and say what he was *thinking* was *rape*. It was attempted sex, not rape.

CM

I agree Caro--we discussed this before, but I'll say it again.  If some was charged with attempted murder, it goes to their intent, and the fact that they failed.  It was not Spike's intention to rape her.  And yeah--she'd been saying "no" the whole season, and never meant it.  He was clearly on the verge of an emotional breakdown. 

Perhaps it was JM's acting, because that episode as well as "Entropy" was designed to deter the viewers from being on Spike's side, and for most of us, it didn't work.  Buffy was one of the villains of that season, and not Spike IMO.  I am sure that I am not alone in that assessment.

Enisy, I agree with you that Spike contributed his share to the ugliness that was season 6 Spuffy.  But I don't think you can use the writers as authorities on this in the way that you want.  They can clarify things that end up being confused because of their own mistakes (i.e. they can tell us that Spike really meant to get the soul, but it doesn't look that way because they were going for a 'plot twist').  What they can't do, however, is tell us how to judge what they show us.

Steve DeKnight, for example, can't tell us that Spike's love was only possessive.  They showed him staying around after Buffy was dead to help -- and that's logically not an expressive of a purely possessive love.  He might have more of a point in claiming that Spike's effort to keep Buffy out of jail was mostly cause he didn't want to loser her -- though his own screenplay shows us that there are other motives that seem to be part of what he's doing there.  As for Spike luring Buffy into the dark to separate her from her friends, DeKnight's own script has Buffy leave her friends and go up to the balcony all on her own.  It then shows Spike playing on that.  But he's clearly playing on something that is already there.  And it's definitely up to the audience to decide what we make of all of that.

As for the term 'attempted rape', that's a label that judges what happened in the bathroom.  But again, the writers don't get to judge for us.  In season 3 the writers described Faith's accidental killing of the deputy mayor as 'murder' -- but that's their judgment.  In my judgment it was manslaughter.  As many have discussed what happened in the bathroom in SR is complex.   Reasonable people can disagree about what to call it.  For myself, I think of it as an 'almost rape' -- something that happened in the heat of the moment -- but not something Spike intended to do (if for no other reason that he knows Buffy is stronger than him -- so he has no reason to think that he *could* do it).

Which is so comforting coming from the guy who said that Angel was Spike's sire then later changes it to Drusilla. If we actually looked at Spike the way the writers tried to make us look at him, half of us prolly wouldn't be Spuffy fans. They are completely correct in what they said about Spike and his relationship with Buffy in S6. We just interperet it differently.

You take a look at Dead Things, Entropy, As you Were, Seering Red and like half the other episodes in S6, and they pretty much constantly tried to villanize(supposing that's a word) throughout it to glorify Buffy some more. No forced Buffy to the balcony in Dead Things. And if she's so devoted to "moral compasses" as you say, how she's the one beating on Spike in the episode. You would think that since the concepts of right and wrong are so foreign to Spike, it would be him beating on Buffy.

Also I'm pretty sure she seperated herself from her friends when she committed suicide in the Gift.  Honestly Buffy's so messed up in the head that she constantly wants to be in the shoes of a victim, which she's not.

Given, Spike didn't make the best of decisions in S6, but he was soulless so I really didn't expect him to, but I didn't expect the 'chosen' one to outdo him in the badness category.

For myself, I think of it as an 'almost rape' -- something that happened in the heat of the moment -- but not something Spike intended to do

There should be a word for the rape equivalent of manslaughter, because that's really what it is. Maybe there's not a word for it because this kind of thing probably doesn't happen in real life (unless, apparently, you're Marti Noxon).

Given, Spike didn't make the best of decisions in S6, but he was soulless so I really didn't expect him to, but I didn't expect the 'chosen' one to outdo him in the badness category.

That's why Spuffy doesn't sound so equal at times, it's easy to blame Spike's mistakes on him being soulless, but if that was the excuse, then I'd also excuse Buffy for treating Spike badly because he's, you know, soulless. If a soulless vampire is not supposed to understand wrong from right, then we can't blame Buffy for not taking her relationship with that certain soulless being seriously.

I don't know about that--saying that she can be excused simply because he's soulless (though I feel that his decisions in s6 were the opposite of a soulless being), because I feel like that's saying it's okay to abuse...animals, for instance, simply because they're "beneath" us, for whatever reason.  If you're above someone or some thing, that doesn't give you the right to treat them like crap.

Well, it kinda depends on which crap you're talking about. Does it give her the right to beat his face into the pavement? No. But using him for sex? If she truly doesn't believe that he can love because he's soulless, then what difference should it make whether she treats it as a relationship or just a means of release and escape?

If Spike is compared to an animal, then there's no need for Buffy to love him back the way he wants, right? Spike is above being an animal, and Buffy knows this. The way she treated him was awful, and she herself admitted that to Tara and in Conversation with Dead people.

That being said, Spike's actions also shouldn't be blamed on his soulless condition. If it's okay to excuse Spike's selfish moments because he's soulless, then we can't blame Buffy for treating him badly. He's soulless, after all.

But if we treat both Spike and Buffy equally, then even soulless Spike's selfish actions should be counted. That's how it becomes an equal relationship. Both parties should be treated the same.

But they aren't the same because Buffy standards aren't Spike's standards, and vice-versa. He doesn't have a conscience, she does. That makes her more accountable, because it should be easier for her to discern right and wrong. If she wanted meaningless sexual release, she should have gone for one-night stands, or used a vibrator. Going to the same sentient being over and over again isn't meaningless, and definitely affects him. It doesn't matter if she believes he can love - she does know he *feels*, and she does know she's treating him horribly. That puts her in the wrong.

It's not just actions, but motives that have to be taken into account. Spike was searching for a connection because he loved her. It's true that he doesn't have "healthy relationship" references, but that's not his fault. Buffy was looking to use anything she could find to "feel", to avoid thoughts of heaven by overwhelming her system with endorphins. She might as well have been a drug addict - she was looking for the same high and release. I would have kept my respect for the character if she *had* been a drug addict, as that makes sense as a response to trauma and depression. But no, we have a Buffy in her full right mind, who knows exactly what she's doing, and does it anyway until it gets too public - and then she breaks his heart. She wouldn't have used his given name if she didn't believe he was a person with feelings - feelings she *knew* she was hurting when she dumped him.

CM, thanks I completely agree with what you said. You really can't judge Spike to Buffy's standards cuz she has a fully useable conscience while Spike didn't. And Spike's conscience in itself was really developed through interactions with the Scoobies. Well that's how I saw it anyhow.

<--totally agrees with CM

Also, Buffy does admit that she realizes that his feelings were real (in "Entropy").  So no, it wasn't okay at all for her to treat him the way that she did, knowing that he truly did love her.  She was supposed to have the moral high ground, but she really did not (at all). 

And I wasn't comparing Spike to an animal, but if you want to view a soulless vamp as beneath a human as Buffy does, that does not give her the right to treat them any old kind of way.  Especially one who she knows loves her.

I agree that Buffy did shameful things to Spike. I never said she didn't. But when discussing that Spike also does things to hurt Buffy, the defense is "He's soulless." Which is not fair. We can also say that Buffy was depressed, but that also doesn't work. Buffy and Spike hurt each other real bad in season six, no matter what excuse they had.

Before "Seeing Red," what things did Spike do to hurt her?  Nothing.  If Buffy had actually treated him decently, then the whole "badness" factor wouldn't have even existed.  Her actions dictated his--he was following her lead.

I agree that Buffy did a lot to hurt Spike.  She used him for her own purposes and then discarded him.  However, he allowed her to treat him that way.  Yes, he is "love's bitch," but he opened the door for the relationship to be that way.  In "Dead Things," he told her to put all her feelings and guilt on him.  Should she have done it?  No.  But he shouldn't have allowed it either.

It's interesting to me that Spike has always been very perceptive about other people (like in "Something Blue" when he knows Willow is still hurting over Oz).  So, why wouldn't he consider the fact that she hurts him is b/c she is disgusted with herself?  I really think what Buffy says in "Dead Things" is more directed at herself than Spike.

I also don't think Spike was totally absent of conscience.  He obviously felt guilty after his actions in "Seeing Red," enough so that he went to get his soul to be better.  If he truly had no conscience, then he wouldn't have bothered, so I don't think that excuse is totally valid for his part in the relationship.  Both of them contributed to the ugliness of it.  When Buffy calls him "William" during the break-up, I think that's her acknowledging that he does have feelings and that it has been wrong for her to use him because of that. 

These are just some jumbled thoughts I have on said subject.  Hopefully, some have merit :)

I always thought in Dead Things that she was using Spike as a stand in for herself during the alley scene. She couldn't beat herself up, and she couldn't take her anger and agression out on her friends, so Spike was her scapegoat.

I also thought that the words she told him weren't aimed at him, but at herself. At her own lack of feelings. She was taking out her anger on him. It was wrong of her yes, but it is a little sad that he lets her do it.

I think Buffy was mostly the abuser in season six, but Spike did contribute a bit to it. He took most of the abuse, and he continued to come to her in spite of it. I don't think it was masochistic exactly, but more because of the fact that he loved her so much.

In Entropy when she called him William as she broke up with him, I think in a way that was more of a blow to him than anything. And in her own way, I think she was owning up to her feelings about him, and his feelings for her. In a way, at the end of Dead Things, she did acknowledge her own abuse of him when she repeats his own words to the scoobies.

Seeing Red was the only really violent scene I saw on his part, and I don't think it was his intention to do what happened in that bathroom.

I think, maybe unconsciously, the writers do tend to glorify their main characters, even in their comments, and paint the others in a darker light. Spike or Faith as an example.

Faith's accidental killing was called murder by the writers, legally and logically it would be called manslaughter. Buffy, has also killed humans before, and it was never addressed. I don't think Gwendolyn Post was ever called a demon, I believe she was human. Yes, she was evil, but she was still human.

Maybe it just is JM's acting, but the way that Spike acted in that scene, that does not suggest to me like it was premeditated and preplanned or that he went into that bathroom with the intention of raping her. I think he went there with the intention of talking to her, and when that wouldn't work he sought to communicate with her in the only way that he believed they ever connected. Through sex. Could it have been called attempted rape, yes, but I'd think of it more in the terms of almost rape.

Buffy, has also killed humans before, and it was never addressed.

Both time when Buffy thinks she's accidentally killed a human (Ted and Katrina), she feels guilty about it and immediately owns up to it. I don't recall Buffy ever actually killing a human. The only time I can think of when she even tried was Faith. She's also deliberately not killed humans, even when she was putting herself at risk by letting them live, with Ben and the nerd trio.

I don't think Gwendolyn Post was ever called a demon, I believe she was human.

She was human, but Buffy didn't kill her. Buffy cut the glove off her arm, which wouldn't necessarily have been fatal, but then she was struck by lightning and that's what killed her.

With Faith, oooo, that's a big one. Buffy had murder in her heart. Her plan was to disable Faith enough that she could get her back to Angel so Angel could cure himself by draining Faith. And when she stabs Faith, she assumes Faith dies in that truck - the audience is lead to believe she's gone, until you see her in the hospital later. If Buffy had succeeded in killing Faith, that would have been Murder 1 - a premeditated deliberate act. But Buffy's never reprimanded about it - at least that we see on screen. She gives Angel her own blood, he nearly drains her, she gets the transfusion in the hospital, and then it's off to kill the Mayor at Graduation.

Buffy acts like she's not a part of Faith and Angel's "Murder Club", but she has been in her heart and attempt, if not final deed. Did Faith deserve to pay for her crimes? Absolutely. Was it Buffy's job to be judge, jury, and executioner? Hell no. But she felt herself 'righteous' enough to do it, anyway. If I'd been Giles, that would have scared the hell out of me for my Slayer, the way she went after Faith for her blood.

CM

Totally forgot about that.  Actually, I find that kind of offensive.  She tries to kill her friends, and that's fine and dandy.  She tries to kill her boyfriend, and then that gives her the right to take Faith out.  I guess that validates murder in the first...

And yeah, it's been said that the alley scene in "Dead Things" is Buffy really talking about herself.  It's probably true.  Even so, I seriously doubt she would've beat oh say, Angel like that if she was feeling all "woe is me" and he'd been there.  I still don't excuse her for it just because she really meant herself and not Spike.  She could've punched herself in the face.  Spike did.

I always wondered, in season three, was Scott's friend Pete still somewhat human, or had he been mutated into a demon?

Spike was being a jerk in the balcony scene and Smashed. He used Buffy's depression sometimes to get her closer to him, and saparates her more from her friends. I admit that his love for her was real, but there was some selfishness on his part at times that led to Buffy being upset. Being upset doesn't have to be about physical abuse, I think Spike was also more hurt by Buffy's words than her beating him up.

Nika--Pete was still human, and willingly took those chemicals to alter himself.

SpikeHot--Buffy took sex from Spike in "Smashed," and whether or not Spike had been at the Bronze in "Dead Things," Buffy still would have willingly separated herself from her friends.  In fact, it is Buffy who wants to keep their relationship a secret.  Had she actually wanted to be happy, as Spike points out, she would have told her friends about them.  And yeah, Xander would've bitched about it inititially, but they all would've gotten over it if it made Buffy happy, especially with the whole "ripped her out of heaven" guilt.  I just don't think it's fair to pass the buck on Spike when he wanted a relationship--a real one with her, and she was the one who denied the both of them.

 Scarlet Ibis it's like you've read my mind again! I probably couldn't have put it as well, but that's exactly how I feel about the subject!

XXX