![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thecarlysutraI warned you. Thanks, as usual, to
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
myhappyface's wonderful beta. Othello in "Becoming II," or How Xander is Iago
Alternate title: Xander sucks, and I've had too much college.
Alternate title: Xander sucks, and I've had too much college.
Joss Whedon is a big fan of Bill Shakespeare; I mean, come on, he named one of his protagonists “Cordelia,” and he has a demon named “Illyria.” Plus all the other stuff.
I’m a fan of Shakespeare, too, and I just reread Othello. Othello is mentioned specifically in Buffy (“Earshot”), though the parallel is the third season binary of Buffy and Faith: how Faith, who betrays, and who enjoys doing bad things, is “the darkside of [Buffy herself],” her Iago. And that’s very interesting. But I find myself more interested in how Xander is Buffy’s Iago.
This essay will focus on Xander’s Iagoing of Buffy throughout the series, with special attention paid to the “handkerchief” events of season two’s “Becoming II.”
The Play
Let’s assume that not everyone has studied Othello, and that, among those of us who have, some of us were so busy daydreaming about Buffy that we missed a few things. So that we’re all on the same page, let’s begin with a brief overview of the play.
Othello is one of Shakespeare’s late tragedies. The story is of a Moor (a term which is early modern English for “unspecified dark-skinned guy”), general of the Venetian army, and of how his fledgling marriage is destroyed by a jealous officer, Iago. As the play opens, the Moor, Othello, has just done two things: promoted a new lieutenant, Cassio, and married a (younger, virginal) white woman, Desdemona. Iago is incensed at being passed over for Cassio’s promotion (and at gossip that both Othello and notorious ladies’ man Cassio have been shacking up with his wife); he doesn’t really care that a black man has married Desdemona, but the mixed marriage provides the perfect vehicle to get under Othello’s skin. Over the course of the play, “Honest Iago” sews lies and innuendos that lead Othello to believe irrefutably that his new bride is sleeping with his new lieutenant. Jealousy drives him mad, and he kills Desdemona, and then himself.
Othello is not really about race. Othello is about Othering: the process of distinguishing a minority (the person who is not “Us,” but “Other”) from the majority, usually paired with ranking that “Other” in a hierarchy of race/sex/religion/whatever. In Othello, Othello is both Othered by the Venetians, and by himself.
It is important also to note that Iago is not, until the very end, recognized by any character in the play as a villain. He is constantly called “honest,” and he is a trusted friend and advisor to Othello, Cassio, and several other characters. I’d like to repeat this, because it is what makes Iago’s betrayal so cutting: Othello trusts Iago implicitly. When Iago’s lies are revealed to him, Othello does not believe it, and seeks to discover whether his friend is the devil in disguise, so betrayed is he.
Everyone on the same page? Super. Now let’s talk about the Othello in Buffy.
Othering and Iagoing
Let’s start with Othering, and position our characters. In the play, Othello is an outsider to the community; it is made clear that he is only respected because of his prowess on the battlefield. Both Angel and Buffy, in this way, are put in Othello’s position; Angel is Other because he is a vampire, and Buffy because she is a woman. They are both uniquely gifted tacticians and warriors, and this secures them unusual position within the group. Though Angel’s relationship to Buffy buys him some benefit of the doubt – helping him, as a vampire in a group of demon hunters, not get killed, for example – his key function within the group is as muscle. He’s almost a secondary Buffy (placing him as Buffy’s second-in-command, the Cassio to her Othello); when Buffy is unavailable, the Scoobies have no qualms in turning to Angel to fulfill her role (“Earshot”).
Buffy’s case is more interesting; she is human, and the peer of Xander, Willow, Cordelia, and Oz, but her position within the group is based upon her place and abilities as Slayer. If Buffy were not the Slayer, how would the other members of the group – especially Xander and Giles – treat her? Would they treat her the way they do Cordelia? As it is, Buffy is the group’s leader; were she not the Slayer, would she be straggling at the rear, the butt of the occasional, “ha ha, you dress like a whore” joke?
So Buffy and Angel are Othered, and they will, at turns, play Othello. Angel will sometimes also find himself in Cassio’s place. Buffy and Angel both will also be, from time to time, Desdemona. The reasons for this are a lot less complicated than it seems: if Angel is Othello, and Buffy is his lover, then Buffy becomes Desdemona. Similarly, if Buffy is Othello, and Angel is her lover, then Angel becomes Desdemona. Of course, since Buffy can also be the virgin, and the innocent, and can be seen simply for her sex, and Angel cannot, Buffy will be Desdemona more ably than Angel.
And then there’s Xander. Xander is not Othered; Xander is, when you think about it, kind of the poster boy for the majority. He’s white, he’s male, he’s “normal;” he has no pesky supernatural powers to differentiate him from the pack. Xander Harris is the majority; he is what Buffy and Angel are Othered from.
But being in the majority is not enough to make Xander Iago. He also needs the implicit trust of the group, despite his ulterior, self-serving motives. And he has it; Xander is rarely questioned, and he is even designated as the “Heart” of the group (“Primeval”); he is Honest Xander, pure of thought and deed. Which brings us to how he’s not so honest or pure.
Xander Iagos Buffy. He lies and manipulates in order to get things he wants, things he feels, as the majority, he deserves. What is interesting about Xander’s Iagoing of Buffy is that it is made complicated because it is defined by her Otherness; Xander would not have the same aim were Buffy not a woman. Let’s look at Xander’s motives, and what he wants, the things he will deceive for. Xander is upset that Buffy chose Angel over him; he asked her out and she said no, because “a guy has to be dead” to get with her (“Prophecy Girl”). So Xander’s aim is not only to best Angel/Cassio, who Buffy/Othello chose instead, it is to “win” Buffy; Buffy herself is the prize that Xander hopes to redeem through his deception.
Revelations and Buffy’s Sex Life
In the play, Iago’s first act against Othello is to run to Desdemona’s father, Brabantio, and inform the man that “an old black ram is stupping your white ewe.” Brabantio was previously unaware of the relationship, and he goes apeshit, running off to the Senate to complain. Othello and Desdemona are both eventually brought in to plead their cases at what has essentially become an impromptu trial.
Which brings us away from “Becoming II,” which we haven’t actually gotten to yet, my bad, to “Revelations.” Xander happens upon Angel, recently back from the dead, locking lips with Buffy. What does Xander do? He convenes Giles, Willow, and Cordelia to sit trial on Buffy, an “intervention,” as she calls it. Without consulting her, he has told everyone not only that she has been “harboring a vicious killer” and lying to all of them, but that she and Angel were kissing, which, were his concern really, “Oh my God, that guy that killed a bunch of our friends is back!” should have been toward the bottom of the list of outrages. But Xander not only informs the group of Buffy’s romantic indiscretions, he uses her sexuality against her. “What [were you waiting for]? For Angel to go psycho again the next time you give him a happy?” Poor Buffy is just a woman; she cannot be trusted with her own sexuality. Especially when she does that with it.
As in Othello, the only person who seems to be interested in Buffy/Desdemona’s voice is her partner. In the trial scene in Othello, Desdemona is brought forth before the Senate, but it is Othello who asks the girl to tell her side of the story. Similarly, the only person who seems interested in Buffy’s thoughts and feelings when the subject is love is Angel, and even he doesn’t do that great a job some of the time, making decisions about their relationship for her (“The Prom”). Anytime the topic is broached with anyone else, their reaction is to tell Buffy that “when it comes to Angel, you can’t see straight,” and “we’re here to help you [make the correct decision]” (“Revelations”). Xander is the worst one with this, again and again, from his constant demonization of Angel to his telling Buffy that she is “acting like a crazy person” by “treating Riley like the rebound guy” (“Into the Woods”).
Majority Xander does not act as though Buffy’s sexuality belongs to her. Think of his yay, Angel is leaving forever! fantasy in “Surprise”: Xander gleefully imagines Buffy – who is a “Denny’s waitress by day, Slayer by night,” as though Xander doesn’t gift her with enough intelligence or agency to have an actual career – crying gratefully when rich and powerful Xander – “fly[ing] into town in [his] private jet;” apparently, Xander gives himself all the intelligence and agency he’ll need – sweeps her off her feet, and out of Angel’s arms. Why wouldn’t Buffy be grateful to be rescued from the life she’s made for herself? I mean, a poor woman, being rescued by Majority Man? A dream come true.
Becoming and Joss’s New Ending for Iago
As season two progresses, Buffy and Angel become more and more removed from the group. And they begin, as Othello does toward the end of the play, to Other themselves. Angelus takes pains to distinguish himself from any scrap of humanity. “Your boyfriend is dead” (“Innocence”). Buffy often finds herself separate from her friends, who all have happy, normal lives with happy, normal relationships, and in the end, she chooses her duties as a Slayer over her family, her normal life. During the events of the “Becoming” episodes, the final ties are broken: Buffy is kicked out of her home and her school, thus eliminating her last ties to a “normal,” majority life; Angelus discovers that it is his blood alone that can unleash the supreme evil of Acathla and send the world to hell (“Becoming II”).
Fully Othered, there’s only Iago to contend with.
In “Becoming II,” as Xander leaves to assist Buffy in her storming of Angel’s mansion, Willow tells him to let Buffy know that she and Oz will be attempting to restore Angel’s soul. When Xander arrives, however, he instead tells Buffy that Willow says to, “kick [Angel’s] ass.”
The question of course is, had Buffy known what was going on, would she still have had to kill Angel? Certainly her attitude might have been different; she might have done more toward stalling the release of Acathla, and less toward killing Angelus. There’s no way to know. However, we can guess the answer to a more interesting question: the question of intent. What was Xander’s intent in omitting Willow’s true message, and instead submitting his own agenda? An argument can be made that he was afraid, if Buffy had hope that Angel could be saved, she would immediately become a weak and helpless girl in love instead of the warrior she really needed to be. However. To me it seems much more likely that Xander’s motives are, as usual, purely selfish: Xander does not want Angel to make it out alive. He does not want Buffy and Angel back together; even though he is, at the moment, in a relationship of his own with Cordelia, he is still not happy about the thought of Buffy with another man, especially Angel, his challenger. His Cassio. Iago’s aim in Othello, remember, is not only to rise to Cassio’s rank; in the process, he wants to punish Cassio, who has taken his place, and Othello, who passed him over. And he does both.
Since Buffy is both the goal of Xander’s deception, and the object/originator (read: Othello) of it, Xander’s desire to punish Buffy is at constant odds with his desire to own her, which accounts for Xander’s mercurial moods toward her. At one turn, he is joking and flirting with her; the next, he is puffed up full of righteous indignation, putting the blood of all Angelus’s victims on her hands (“Revelations”) or telling her that he’ll kill her (“When She Was Bad”).
So what is the outcome of Xander/Iago’s deception? As it is in the book: Xander’s lie results in Buffy/Othello killing her lover, and then, in her grief, removing herself from the city. Now in the play, Othello doesn’t hop a Greyhound as Buffy does; he kills himself, too. Perhaps it is Buffy’s survival that changes Xander/Iago’s fate. In the play, Iago is found out (too late, but much sooner than Xander is), and then dragged off to be tortured and, presumably, killed for treason. His last line is a vow to never speak again. But Xander is never punished for his deceptions. Even when his lie is revealed (five seasons later, in “Selfless”), it goes completely unnoticed. Xander is never punished for his deception, and he never gives up his speech, so he is free to continue deceiving. Which begs the question: do the writers of Buffy sympathize with Iago? Do they condone Xander’s manipulation of his friends? Why else would he continue on, uncensored and unpunished, unless Joss was trying to tell us something?
Let’s think about early modern England, Shakespeare’s time, for a minute. During Shakespeare’s time, women were very Other. They were considered to be physiologically and psychologically inferior to men; they couldn’t own property, or have a legal say, without a man. A man who murdered his wife was tried for murder; a woman who murdered her husband was tried for murder and treason, because she had acted against her king and god, and in those days the country was the same as the king was the same as God. What’s the relevance to Xander’s lack of punishment? Perhaps Xander gets away scot-free because he’s the majority. The only crime he committed was against an Other, and that’s only the natural order of things, that the majority should control the world, including the world of the Other, and if they need to get Machiavellian about it, so be it. And, to follow up on the king and god bit, Xander is a character-insertion of the show’s creator, Joss Whedon, who is white, middle-class, and a man. He represents the same majority Xander does. And in this universe, he is God. It’s only fitting that God’s will be done.
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I’m a fan of Shakespeare, too, and I just reread Othello. Othello is mentioned specifically in Buffy (“Earshot”), though the parallel is the third season binary of Buffy and Faith: how Faith, who betrays, and who enjoys doing bad things, is “the darkside of [Buffy herself],” her Iago. And that’s very interesting. But I find myself more interested in how Xander is Buffy’s Iago.
This essay will focus on Xander’s Iagoing of Buffy throughout the series, with special attention paid to the “handkerchief” events of season two’s “Becoming II.”
The Play
Let’s assume that not everyone has studied Othello, and that, among those of us who have, some of us were so busy daydreaming about Buffy that we missed a few things. So that we’re all on the same page, let’s begin with a brief overview of the play.
Othello is one of Shakespeare’s late tragedies. The story is of a Moor (a term which is early modern English for “unspecified dark-skinned guy”), general of the Venetian army, and of how his fledgling marriage is destroyed by a jealous officer, Iago. As the play opens, the Moor, Othello, has just done two things: promoted a new lieutenant, Cassio, and married a (younger, virginal) white woman, Desdemona. Iago is incensed at being passed over for Cassio’s promotion (and at gossip that both Othello and notorious ladies’ man Cassio have been shacking up with his wife); he doesn’t really care that a black man has married Desdemona, but the mixed marriage provides the perfect vehicle to get under Othello’s skin. Over the course of the play, “Honest Iago” sews lies and innuendos that lead Othello to believe irrefutably that his new bride is sleeping with his new lieutenant. Jealousy drives him mad, and he kills Desdemona, and then himself.
Othello is not really about race. Othello is about Othering: the process of distinguishing a minority (the person who is not “Us,” but “Other”) from the majority, usually paired with ranking that “Other” in a hierarchy of race/sex/religion/whatever. In Othello, Othello is both Othered by the Venetians, and by himself.
It is important also to note that Iago is not, until the very end, recognized by any character in the play as a villain. He is constantly called “honest,” and he is a trusted friend and advisor to Othello, Cassio, and several other characters. I’d like to repeat this, because it is what makes Iago’s betrayal so cutting: Othello trusts Iago implicitly. When Iago’s lies are revealed to him, Othello does not believe it, and seeks to discover whether his friend is the devil in disguise, so betrayed is he.
Everyone on the same page? Super. Now let’s talk about the Othello in Buffy.
Othering and Iagoing
Let’s start with Othering, and position our characters. In the play, Othello is an outsider to the community; it is made clear that he is only respected because of his prowess on the battlefield. Both Angel and Buffy, in this way, are put in Othello’s position; Angel is Other because he is a vampire, and Buffy because she is a woman. They are both uniquely gifted tacticians and warriors, and this secures them unusual position within the group. Though Angel’s relationship to Buffy buys him some benefit of the doubt – helping him, as a vampire in a group of demon hunters, not get killed, for example – his key function within the group is as muscle. He’s almost a secondary Buffy (placing him as Buffy’s second-in-command, the Cassio to her Othello); when Buffy is unavailable, the Scoobies have no qualms in turning to Angel to fulfill her role (“Earshot”).
Buffy’s case is more interesting; she is human, and the peer of Xander, Willow, Cordelia, and Oz, but her position within the group is based upon her place and abilities as Slayer. If Buffy were not the Slayer, how would the other members of the group – especially Xander and Giles – treat her? Would they treat her the way they do Cordelia? As it is, Buffy is the group’s leader; were she not the Slayer, would she be straggling at the rear, the butt of the occasional, “ha ha, you dress like a whore” joke?
So Buffy and Angel are Othered, and they will, at turns, play Othello. Angel will sometimes also find himself in Cassio’s place. Buffy and Angel both will also be, from time to time, Desdemona. The reasons for this are a lot less complicated than it seems: if Angel is Othello, and Buffy is his lover, then Buffy becomes Desdemona. Similarly, if Buffy is Othello, and Angel is her lover, then Angel becomes Desdemona. Of course, since Buffy can also be the virgin, and the innocent, and can be seen simply for her sex, and Angel cannot, Buffy will be Desdemona more ably than Angel.
And then there’s Xander. Xander is not Othered; Xander is, when you think about it, kind of the poster boy for the majority. He’s white, he’s male, he’s “normal;” he has no pesky supernatural powers to differentiate him from the pack. Xander Harris is the majority; he is what Buffy and Angel are Othered from.
But being in the majority is not enough to make Xander Iago. He also needs the implicit trust of the group, despite his ulterior, self-serving motives. And he has it; Xander is rarely questioned, and he is even designated as the “Heart” of the group (“Primeval”); he is Honest Xander, pure of thought and deed. Which brings us to how he’s not so honest or pure.
Xander Iagos Buffy. He lies and manipulates in order to get things he wants, things he feels, as the majority, he deserves. What is interesting about Xander’s Iagoing of Buffy is that it is made complicated because it is defined by her Otherness; Xander would not have the same aim were Buffy not a woman. Let’s look at Xander’s motives, and what he wants, the things he will deceive for. Xander is upset that Buffy chose Angel over him; he asked her out and she said no, because “a guy has to be dead” to get with her (“Prophecy Girl”). So Xander’s aim is not only to best Angel/Cassio, who Buffy/Othello chose instead, it is to “win” Buffy; Buffy herself is the prize that Xander hopes to redeem through his deception.
Revelations and Buffy’s Sex Life
In the play, Iago’s first act against Othello is to run to Desdemona’s father, Brabantio, and inform the man that “an old black ram is stupping your white ewe.” Brabantio was previously unaware of the relationship, and he goes apeshit, running off to the Senate to complain. Othello and Desdemona are both eventually brought in to plead their cases at what has essentially become an impromptu trial.
Which brings us away from “Becoming II,” which we haven’t actually gotten to yet, my bad, to “Revelations.” Xander happens upon Angel, recently back from the dead, locking lips with Buffy. What does Xander do? He convenes Giles, Willow, and Cordelia to sit trial on Buffy, an “intervention,” as she calls it. Without consulting her, he has told everyone not only that she has been “harboring a vicious killer” and lying to all of them, but that she and Angel were kissing, which, were his concern really, “Oh my God, that guy that killed a bunch of our friends is back!” should have been toward the bottom of the list of outrages. But Xander not only informs the group of Buffy’s romantic indiscretions, he uses her sexuality against her. “What [were you waiting for]? For Angel to go psycho again the next time you give him a happy?” Poor Buffy is just a woman; she cannot be trusted with her own sexuality. Especially when she does that with it.
As in Othello, the only person who seems to be interested in Buffy/Desdemona’s voice is her partner. In the trial scene in Othello, Desdemona is brought forth before the Senate, but it is Othello who asks the girl to tell her side of the story. Similarly, the only person who seems interested in Buffy’s thoughts and feelings when the subject is love is Angel, and even he doesn’t do that great a job some of the time, making decisions about their relationship for her (“The Prom”). Anytime the topic is broached with anyone else, their reaction is to tell Buffy that “when it comes to Angel, you can’t see straight,” and “we’re here to help you [make the correct decision]” (“Revelations”). Xander is the worst one with this, again and again, from his constant demonization of Angel to his telling Buffy that she is “acting like a crazy person” by “treating Riley like the rebound guy” (“Into the Woods”).
Majority Xander does not act as though Buffy’s sexuality belongs to her. Think of his yay, Angel is leaving forever! fantasy in “Surprise”: Xander gleefully imagines Buffy – who is a “Denny’s waitress by day, Slayer by night,” as though Xander doesn’t gift her with enough intelligence or agency to have an actual career – crying gratefully when rich and powerful Xander – “fly[ing] into town in [his] private jet;” apparently, Xander gives himself all the intelligence and agency he’ll need – sweeps her off her feet, and out of Angel’s arms. Why wouldn’t Buffy be grateful to be rescued from the life she’s made for herself? I mean, a poor woman, being rescued by Majority Man? A dream come true.
Becoming and Joss’s New Ending for Iago
As season two progresses, Buffy and Angel become more and more removed from the group. And they begin, as Othello does toward the end of the play, to Other themselves. Angelus takes pains to distinguish himself from any scrap of humanity. “Your boyfriend is dead” (“Innocence”). Buffy often finds herself separate from her friends, who all have happy, normal lives with happy, normal relationships, and in the end, she chooses her duties as a Slayer over her family, her normal life. During the events of the “Becoming” episodes, the final ties are broken: Buffy is kicked out of her home and her school, thus eliminating her last ties to a “normal,” majority life; Angelus discovers that it is his blood alone that can unleash the supreme evil of Acathla and send the world to hell (“Becoming II”).
Fully Othered, there’s only Iago to contend with.
In “Becoming II,” as Xander leaves to assist Buffy in her storming of Angel’s mansion, Willow tells him to let Buffy know that she and Oz will be attempting to restore Angel’s soul. When Xander arrives, however, he instead tells Buffy that Willow says to, “kick [Angel’s] ass.”
The question of course is, had Buffy known what was going on, would she still have had to kill Angel? Certainly her attitude might have been different; she might have done more toward stalling the release of Acathla, and less toward killing Angelus. There’s no way to know. However, we can guess the answer to a more interesting question: the question of intent. What was Xander’s intent in omitting Willow’s true message, and instead submitting his own agenda? An argument can be made that he was afraid, if Buffy had hope that Angel could be saved, she would immediately become a weak and helpless girl in love instead of the warrior she really needed to be. However. To me it seems much more likely that Xander’s motives are, as usual, purely selfish: Xander does not want Angel to make it out alive. He does not want Buffy and Angel back together; even though he is, at the moment, in a relationship of his own with Cordelia, he is still not happy about the thought of Buffy with another man, especially Angel, his challenger. His Cassio. Iago’s aim in Othello, remember, is not only to rise to Cassio’s rank; in the process, he wants to punish Cassio, who has taken his place, and Othello, who passed him over. And he does both.
Since Buffy is both the goal of Xander’s deception, and the object/originator (read: Othello) of it, Xander’s desire to punish Buffy is at constant odds with his desire to own her, which accounts for Xander’s mercurial moods toward her. At one turn, he is joking and flirting with her; the next, he is puffed up full of righteous indignation, putting the blood of all Angelus’s victims on her hands (“Revelations”) or telling her that he’ll kill her (“When She Was Bad”).
So what is the outcome of Xander/Iago’s deception? As it is in the book: Xander’s lie results in Buffy/Othello killing her lover, and then, in her grief, removing herself from the city. Now in the play, Othello doesn’t hop a Greyhound as Buffy does; he kills himself, too. Perhaps it is Buffy’s survival that changes Xander/Iago’s fate. In the play, Iago is found out (too late, but much sooner than Xander is), and then dragged off to be tortured and, presumably, killed for treason. His last line is a vow to never speak again. But Xander is never punished for his deceptions. Even when his lie is revealed (five seasons later, in “Selfless”), it goes completely unnoticed. Xander is never punished for his deception, and he never gives up his speech, so he is free to continue deceiving. Which begs the question: do the writers of Buffy sympathize with Iago? Do they condone Xander’s manipulation of his friends? Why else would he continue on, uncensored and unpunished, unless Joss was trying to tell us something?
Let’s think about early modern England, Shakespeare’s time, for a minute. During Shakespeare’s time, women were very Other. They were considered to be physiologically and psychologically inferior to men; they couldn’t own property, or have a legal say, without a man. A man who murdered his wife was tried for murder; a woman who murdered her husband was tried for murder and treason, because she had acted against her king and god, and in those days the country was the same as the king was the same as God. What’s the relevance to Xander’s lack of punishment? Perhaps Xander gets away scot-free because he’s the majority. The only crime he committed was against an Other, and that’s only the natural order of things, that the majority should control the world, including the world of the Other, and if they need to get Machiavellian about it, so be it. And, to follow up on the king and god bit, Xander is a character-insertion of the show’s creator, Joss Whedon, who is white, middle-class, and a man. He represents the same majority Xander does. And in this universe, he is God. It’s only fitting that God’s will be done.
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-05 03:58 am (UTC)I find the argument flawed because I do not think it was Buffy's fault. I do not think it was Angel's fault. I do not blame either of them. I think blaming Buffy has sexist overtones. I think blaming Angel makes no sense in context.
I actually cited Jenny as a victim, not someone who deserved her fate. You blame the gypsies, I don't. The only reason Angel/Angelus was cursed to begin with was because he was a murderer. I think the curse was a good one, since it gave him the chance at redemption, but removed that chance if he decided to pursue his own desires.
And if Angelus gets a moment of happiness, he loses his soul and wrecks havok on more people. Like he did. In the canon. Revenge is never a good thing. I think they should have never risked Angel losing his soul and found a different way to punish him if they wanted revenge that badly.
Giles was a child compared to Angel, no matter how they physically appeared.
I disagree. Angel is highly immature and emotionally stunted. Giles is fairly well adjusted, all things considering. Also the issue is that he thinks of Buffy, Willow and Xander as children. Angel sees Buffy as a woman in her own right.
If having a soul gave Angel the tools for redemption, perhaps he should've used them.
...And he was. See: helping out Buffy saving the world. His love for her doesn't invalidate what he did.
He should have known better than to have a romance with someone who hasn't had even enough time to mature.
Because he thinks highly of her. He thinks she's strong. He thought, for a second, love could conquer all. Both Buffy and Angel have to learn that lesson. And I don't think Angel making a choice about their relationship is taking the high rode - I always thought he was being selfish and short-sighted when he left her (although I did understand his motives for doing so.)
I didn't like the Spike-with-a-soul plot much either. However, it is canon. I'm not going to deny what happened just cos I don't like it. And there is this part that people with souls can do horrible things (see: season six) and that Spike was being used by The First.
Angel did something selfish, and lost the thing that was preventing him from killing.
Sleeping with the woman he loves when he didn't know about the curse is not selfish. Sleeping with Darla in hopes to lose his soul, however, was selfish.
He then returned to being the mass murderer that he had been. Do I think he had himself to blame? Yep.
...HE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE CURSE. It not something he can be blamed for.
I give Buffy a little blame because he's a vampire and she's letting emotion overrule sense.
Christ SHE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE CURSE. How can be be blamed for something like that? SHE CAN'T.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-05 04:28 am (UTC)He didn't know about the curse, but HE KNEW HE WAS A VAMPIRE. Forming an intimate relationship with a much younger person he could emotionally destroy simply by being himself was, in my opinion, utterly selfish.
Buffy didn't know about the curse, but SHE KNEW ANGEL HAD MURDERED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. She knew that she had the responsibility to destroy vampires. If she was a normal teenage girl, I wouldn't blame her at all. However, she knew very well what he had done and what he had the potential to do again.
To me, it's akin to a naive kid falling in love with a killer just out of prison. He/she may be rehabilitated, he/she may have all the best intentions, but there's no guarantee that the factors that caused him/her to be a killer in the first place will not cause him/her to return to old ways.
If the situation had been reversed, if Angel was the teen aged slayer, and Buffy was the 300 year old vampire, I would reverse my opinion as well. Buffy would be to blame for her own fate, and Angel would hold the minor blame of letting youthful emotions overcome sense.
Sexism has no place in my argument, execpt where you try to insert it.
I'm done here, at least for tonight. I've wasted too much time arguing a TV show anyway.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-05 04:35 am (UTC)I don't disagree that he's an adult. I think he's damaged and emotionally stunted. I think Giles is way more mature than him. I think Giles relates to Willow in a way that makes Giles/Willow possibly squicky in a way that Buffy and Angel do not.
You exempt him from personal responsibility while I hold him to it.
Um no. I even held him into account for Darla. I just don't see how the curse being broken the first time is his fault when he had no idea about it. I think the very idea is stupid.
but SHE KNEW ANGEL HAD MURDERED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.
He had a soul. She thought he could do good. She was willing to give him a chance. How terribly slutty of her.
She knew that she had the responsibility to destroy vampires.
A soul makes all the difference. See: the text of the show.
However, she knew very well what he had done and what he had the potential to do again.
She knew he's lose his soul if she slept with him? OKAY.
To me, it's akin to a naive kid falling in love with a killer just out of prison.
If the killer has no free will? And Angel has had his soul for 100 years. I think your analogy is flawed.
He/she may be rehabilitated, he/she may have all the best intentions, but there's no guarantee that the factors that caused him/her to be a killer in the first place will not cause him/her to return to old ways.
And how could she possibly think having sex with Angel = him losing his soul. Was there any hint at all that he would? No.
If the situation had been reversed, if Angel was the teen aged slayer, and Buffy was the 300 year old vampire, I would reverse my opinion as well. Buffy would be to blame for her own fate, and Angel would hold the minor blame of letting youthful emotions overcome sense.
It would still be dumb.
And I'll concede that you perhaps did not mean to be sexist, but the argument that a woman who has sex and leads a man do do bad things has sexist weight.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-05 05:07 am (UTC)YOU are the one calling Buffy a slut. I never once said that. My problem was with the romance, not the act. YOU simply assumed I was talking about sex and you continue to emphasize it. Who's the sexist now?
Buffy knew Angel was a killer. Angel knew he was a killer. They had no way of knowing if the soul was permanent or not. They assumed it was, and innocent people died as a result. I don't say they should have assumed the curse. I say they should have avoided a situation where Buffy would be emotionally attached to an individual whom she might be forced to kill.
I am very sorry that you think personal responsibility is dumb. To me, it's the hallmark of an adult.
I a
no subject
Date: 2008-08-05 05:16 am (UTC)YOU are the one calling Buffy a slut.
I was being sarcastic.
My problem was with the romance, not the act. YOU simply assumed I was talking about sex and you continue to emphasize it. Who's the sexist now?
You don't think they should have had sex at all? At any rate the point is kind of moot: a moment of perfect happiness didn't have to be sex.
Buffy knew Angel was a killer. Angel knew he was a killer.
Was. When he had no soul. Angel wanted to atone. Buffy gave him a chance. I fail to see how any of that is bad.
They had no way of knowing if the soul was permanent or not.
They had good reason to think that it would, as Angel had it for 100 years. And would suffer for what he did even if he did have moments of not hating himself completely. They has every reason to believe it was permanent to punish Angel forever.
They assumed it was, and innocent people died as a result.
That's so different from the millions of innocent people being turned into a vamp, how? Sometimes shit happens and there is no one to blame.
I don't say they should have assumed the curse. I say they should have avoided a situation where Buffy would be emotionally attached to an individual whom she might be forced to kill.
Newsflash: see season five. Anyone Buffy grows to love she could possibly have to kill. It's a risk that she chooses to take and it's what's kept her alive. It's what made her dangerous. It's what makes her human.
I am very sorry that you think personal responsibility is dumb. To me, it's the hallmark of an adult.
I don't disagree that a person needs to take personal responsibility for their actions - I simply disagree that Angel or Buffy were wrong to have sex. They didn't know what could happen. They couldn't have. Shit happened. Blaming yourself for things that aren't your fault is profoundly dumb and Buffy and Angel are guilty of that all the time, anyway.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-06 01:25 am (UTC)We've argued this to death, so I won't be coming back here. Go ahead, have the last word. I don't mind.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-06 01:30 am (UTC)And as you can see from my comments: I am unsure how I feel about Xander. I don't, for a second, think he's the cause of all evil in Buffyverse. I do think him lying to Buffy and using Willow in Becoming Part II was a dickish move and I resent that no one ever called him on his shit.
I suggest you stop putting words in people's mouths and read what they're saying if you hate debating so much. Because to do it well you have to listen to what other people say and take their side into account.