FANDOM


vampire with a soul

I have seen several links to 'vampire with a soul', an, as yet non-existent article. I was wondering if they should be linked to this page, or create a new article. This article doesn't mention how a demon would regain his soul or what that would mean, so more would be needed in this article if we chose to use it. A morris 13:07, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I've seen those redlinks too and I think making it redirect here is a good idea. It would make for an interesting article. —Scott (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd have to disagree, just because labeling one vampire as the 'vampire with a soul' is impossible since their are two (not keeping up with the comic-series..I assume that's still the case?). Soul should link here, and vampire should link to vampire. trying to get this closed out as an active talk page since the below issue has been addressed Hakatri 17:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Hakatri
That's fine Hakatri. Since the article has been rewritten, that makes sense. -- a_morris 22:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch, removing as active talk page Hakatri 17:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Hakatri

a Scientificky Soul?

I'm not sure where the author got this 'psychic organ' theory, and I don't want to get into a religious debate, but we're not talking our reality, but buffyverse reality. It's very well written, so please don't take offense here, but shouldn't definitions be produced from material from the show(s)? I don't recall any show defining a soul as a "non-physical component of individual human identity evolved by our distant, protohuman ancestors that through a subconscious telepathic network link with every other human"

Let's take a look at Buffy Season 7, episode 2 "Beneath You". Spike is describing to Buffy, his feelings which announce his reensoulment.

Spike: "And now everybody’s in here, talking. Everything I did, everyone I… and him… and it… the other. The thing beneath… beneath you. It’s here, too. Everybody. They all just tell me go. Go… to hell.."

The reference to "it" is obviously (the thing beneath) The First. But what is "him"? Personally I took this as a reference to God, I think Joss has always treaded around religion well, so this was open to interpretation, but I enjoyed this scene for this reason. There must also be a reason the Christian cross, and priest-blessed Holy Water burn a vampire, while neither a Buddha Statue nor one of those mocky Darwin evolution fish doesn't.


To sidestep the subject somewhat; "A soul is an ethereal substance particular to a human being." Linking the soul to humanity is a primary vein flowing through this description, and in the buffyverse, this is incorrect.

Buffy season 1, "The Harvest" Giles is describing the history of the Vampire to Buffy:

Giles: "The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a human, mixed their blood. He was a human form possessed, infected by the *demon's soul*."

Another example:

Angel season 2, "Guise will be Guise":

Wesley: "The Host, the fellow talking to Angel over there? He helps demons, reads *their souls*, senses their futures..."

We can't go on the premise that all demons don't have souls just because a vampire does not. A Vampire has no soul because he was once human and lost it. A vampire is a demon, but a demon is not always a vampire.


Lastly I'd have to disagree with this statement: That sense of belonging to something greater is gone.

Lets take Holden, a new vampire expressing to Buffy, the new feelings of becoming a vampire:

Buffy season 7, "Conversations with Dead People":

HOLDEN: "No, no. Feels great. Strong. Like I'm connected to a powerful all-consuming evil that's gonna suck the world into a firey oblivion. How 'bout you?"

Hakatri 16:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Hakat

Yes, while the article is well written, there is ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS for any of it anywhere in the Buffyverse, not to mention that the part about vampires is completely inaccurate (a new body is not created, the demon possesses the original human body). Also, as demonstrated by Spike, Lorne, Mayor Wilkins (who sold his soul), and James and Elizabeth in "Heartthrob", demons and creatures without souls are in fact very capable of love. In fact, the only emotions they seem incapable of displaying are remorse, guilt, and self-loathing.
How would this be for a start of a new entry, because what is here has got to go:
A soul, as defined by the Buffyverse, is an incorporeal, insubstantial "essence" which inhabits humans and some demons, with many facets of their personality dependent upon the soul.
==Emotions==
While the soul is not necessary for a creature to feel all emotions (several characters without souls, both demon, human, and vampire, have been known to love), the soul is what determines if the creature is capable of feeling guilt, remorse, or self-loathing. A creature without a soul is capable of killing mercilessly and randomly without feeling the slightest bit of remorse, while someone with a soul is generally wracked with guilt.
==Resurrection==
A soul is also the necessary part of any resurrection. As Spike said "Shells", the body is "only the tip of the theological iceberg". In most resurrections seen on the shows, the body is considered unnecessary and can either be magically recreated or restored, but without a soul the resurrection is pointless.
==Death==
When something ensouled dies, or a human becomes a vampire, the soul leaves their body and goes to another, unknown plane, originally referred to by Jenny Calendar as the "ether". Where the soul goes to and if the actions done by the creature in life determine where it goes is still undecided, but it is confirmed that when Buffy died her soul went to a heavenly dimension and that Cordelia began acting as a Power on a higher plane after her death. It is also possible that a soul displaced from the body after turning into a vampire is in a floaty state of limbo on this plane, as such souls are so much more easily recalled and there is no evidence to such a soul "moving on"
If no one responds within 48 hours I am going to replace this article with the one I just wrote.
Also, to Hakatri, the "all of them" that Spike was referring to is most likely all the people that he's killed, and the "him" is included in that category. Kingdom2 18:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
That sounds like a goods start Kingdom2. (I corrected one spelling mistake) -- A morris 19:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. May anyone please feel free to contribute further to what I wrote. I will still wait the 48 hours I think. Kingdom2 01:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
I really don't like the "Emotions" section, which just seems to make souls (in the Buffyverse) seem like a really bad thing to have! I mean, from reading this, it just seems that anyone with a soul is just really depressed all the time. Personally, I always saw Buffyverse-souls as being able to give one self-awareness and the opportunity for personal growth; vamps just can't quite 'take in' what they're doing when they kill someone. As a result, someone with a soul can be really full of remorse, but presumably they could also be happy or loving in a way that a soulless person could not, too.
This all seems pretty baseless, I know, but I presumably must have gotten this idea from somewhere, so I'll have a look round for references (I seem to remember be-souled Spike talking about his relationship with Drusilla from his new, besouled viewpoint as giving me some idea of this). Other than that, the above is much better than the article as is, yes. --Jayunderscorezero 12:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok, here I am, back again with some more practical criticism this time. How about a) making the above section on resurrection a subsection of the section on death (which makes sense, no?) and b) perhaps replacing the above section on emotions with something more like the following, as I'm still not happy with what that piece seems to be implying (that souls = self-loathing):
==Good and Evil==
Souls are commonly associated with good whilst soullessness is associated with evil. However, this is fallacious, as many ensouled creatures are still capable of evil acts. What is evident, however, is that a number of soulless creatures such as vampires are typically evil in nature, but have been known to become appalled by their own evil actions once a re-ensoulment has taken place. Hence, the return of a soul is often traumatic for vampires with a long history of evil acts, as witnessed in the cases of Angel, Spike and Darla (returned to life as a human with a soul, then later also affected by the soul that would come to be associated with Connor).
I would also consider rewriting the opening spiel. After all, even in the Buffyverse, souls are not something that "inhabits" a person, a soul is that person, or a vital part of them, at least.
A soul, as defined by the Buffyverse, is an incorporeal, insubstantial "essence" that constitutes part of the definition of an individual. Humans and some demons possess souls, whereas other creatures such as most demons do not, which is supposed to account at least partially for their nature and behaviour.
Any thoughts?--Jayunderscorezero 15:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with making resurrection a subset of death and I like the "Good and Evil" section, but the problem is that, while my version is completely based on the emotions of soulless and ensouled individuals, yours is completely action based, with no mention of emotions. We need a compromise between the two.

As for love, while Spike may have questioned his feelings for Drusilla later on, this does not change the James and Elizabeth "Heartthrob" example (two vampires passionately in love for over two centuries), along with the Drusilla quote from "Crush" where she said that vampires are very capable of love, though not always wisely (not sure of the exact phrasing).

You also fail to mention that soulless individuals are capable of great acts of goodness and sacrifice (Spike, "Intervention" and "The Gift"). It only really takes one line to fix this though. The result would be this:

==Good and Evil==
Souls are commonly associated with good whilst soullessness is associated with evil. However, this is fallacious, as many ensouled creatures are still capable of evil acts *while many soulless individuals are capable of both acts of good and sacrifice*. What is evident, however, is that a number of soulless creatures such as vampires are typically evil in nature, but have been known to become appalled by their own evil actions once a re-ensoulment has taken place. Hence, the return of a soul is often traumatic for vampires with a long history of evil acts, as witnessed in the cases of Angel, Spike and Darla (returned to life as a human with a soul, then later also affected by the soul that would come to be associated with Connor).

Any thoughts on how to combine the emotion and action elements? Kingdom2 16:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that Darla quote was exactly the one I was thinking about. For some reason my memory had erroneously attributed it to Spike. Thanks for clearing that up.
As for the emotion involved, one could still make mention of the emotions tied into having one's soul restored. I mentioned "appalled" but there are of course more, obviously. Perhaps we could amalgamate the two sections. However, I'd want to shy away from sweeping statements like "soulless creatures cannot feel guilt." How about replacing something like "the soul is what determines if the creature is capable of feeling guilt, remorse, or self-loathing" with "the soul can determine whether or not a creature is capable of appreciating the evilness of their own actions, with ensouled individuals tending to rationalise or deny their evil deeds, whilst creatures such as vampires can kill without care or remorse."
Again, I'm seeing things through actions rather than emotions, I know, but I just don't see any evidence that soulless creatures can't feel remorse or guilt, just that they don't. Or rather, they don't tend to when it comes to things like murder, or other things that involve hurting other people. This is obviously a point on which we apparently differ, though. --Jayunderscorezero 17:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

How about just tacking on that sentence you wrote to the end of the "good and evil" section. If we combine everything we have gotten so far, it would look like this (I thought it would be a good idea to collaborate the page, as there are so many pieces scattered everywhere):

A soul, as defined by the Buffyverse, is an incorporeal, insubstantial "essence" that constitutes part of the definition of an individual. Humans and some demons possess souls, whereas other creatures such as most demons do not, which is supposed to account at least partially for their nature and behaviour.
==Good and Evil==
Souls are commonly associated with good whilst soullessness is associated with evil. However, this is fallacious, as many ensouled creatures are still capable of evil acts while many soulless individuals are capable of both acts of good and sacrifice. What is evident, however, is that a number of soulless creatures such as vampires are typically evil in nature, but have been known to become appalled by their own evil actions once a re-ensoulment has taken place. Hence, the return of a soul is often traumatic for vampires with a long history of evil acts, as witnessed in the cases of Angel, Spike and Darla (returned to life as a human with a soul, then later also affected by the soul that would come to be associated with Connor). The soul also can determine whether or not a creature is capable of fully appreciating the evilness of their own actions, with ensouled individuals tending to rationalise or deny their evil deeds, whilst creatures such as vampires can kill without care or remorse.
==Death==
When something ensouled dies, or a human becomes a vampire, the soul leaves their body and goes to another, unknown plane, originally referred to by Jenny Calendar as the "ether". Where the soul goes to and if the actions done by the creature in life determine where it goes is still undecided, but it is confirmed that when Buffy died her soul went to a heavenly dimension and that Cordelia began acting as a Power on a higher plane after her death. It is also possible that a soul displaced from the body after turning into a vampire is in a floaty state of limbo on this plane, as such souls are so much more easily recalled and there is no evidence of such a soul having "moved on"
===Resurrection===
A soul is also the necessary part of any resurrection. As Spike said "Shells", the body is "only the tip of the theological iceberg". In most resurrections seen on the shows, the body is considered unnecessary and can either be magically recreated (such as with Darla) or restored (such as with Buffy) but without a soul the resurrection is pointless.

The death and resurrection sections might need a little work. See if you can do anything about that. Kingdom2 17:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, in reply to the question of guilt, I do think that you are right, and Spike is the perfect study for this issue. He is incapable of feeling guilt for killing and hurting people, as is shown several times, but he also shows in "Intervention" that he "wouldn't be able to bear it" if he had let down Buffy and given them up to Glory, and in "Bargaining, Part One" that he feels that he let Buffy down and feels guilt because of it, and attempts to make up for it by looking after Dawn. But, when he tries to rape Buffy, which is an action where he simultaneously tries to hurt someone and in a way lets Buffy down, he feels intensely conflicted and cannot seem to wrap his head around it. On one hand, he can't believe what he just did, and on the other he can't believe that he didn't go through with it, and it was this conflict and the desire to be good enough for Buffy that made him seek out his soul.

(Breathe) So yes, I do think that you are right in that a soulless creature is capable of feeling guilt, but only for certain things. For killing and hurting people, no, for letting down those the love, yes. This probably deserves mentioning somewhere, I just do not know where. Kingdom2 18:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The above draft looks really good now. Thanks for all your efforts. We might want to add a section on when one starts to have a soul. After all, this may be hotly debated in the real world, but in the Buffyverse they clearly give Connor a soul before he is even born, although that may have something to do with his special status. We may want to add a paragraph like that. Or indeed, like this:
==Origin of souls==
It is never explicitly stated from where or at what point in time one's soul originates. However, in the case of Connor, the fetal Connor is presented with a soul some time before birth, although it was not made clear whether or not this was due to Connor's special status as the child of two vampires, or whether this is the usual case.
Other than that, the above article is pretty much good to go, in my opinion. It's not perfect (yet), but then again, this is a wiki, and that can be worked on. --Jayunderscorezero 19:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Here we go Kingdom2 19:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You guys all did a fabulous job rewriting this puppy, thanks all, you rock! I consider the original question/concern I posted addressed. Hakatri 17:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Hakatri

==

"Souls are commonly associated with good whilst soullessness is associated with evil. However, this is fallacious..."

It may not be. Yes, soulled beings are capable of great evil and souless ones of great good, but didn't Spike only try to help Dawn out of loyalty to her and Buffy? It could be that only ensoulled beings are capable of doing good for its own sake (in other words, doing the right thing just because it's the right thing) while souless beings can still do good for other selfless reasons such as loyalty.

Break

First, sign your comments. Second, no one can know motivations without going into in-depth character studies, which is just not what this wiki is for. The very fact that Spike stayed to help save Dawn and entered a fight that meant almost certain death, and didn't run away to save his own skin (much like ensouled Anya did in "Graduation Day") proves that a soulless being is capable of great good, no matter what the motivation. kingdom2 23:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I diddn't sign. Still, isn't the fact that getting a soul always seems to make vampires feel guilty about what they did proof that associating soulfullness with good and soulessness with evil is not "falicious"? 411314 98.209.61.56 22:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Not automatically. The Buffyverse ain't Charmed where humans are all good and demons all evil. Lets take Marcus Roscoe for example: when he exchanged bodies with Angel, he became a vampire with a soul, but he was fine with being a predator and had no qualms about killing.--Gonzalo84 04:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Soul, Ether

A suggestion. Since the entries on this thread are old, it might be good to omit them or move them somewhere else, so we could start over. Can that be done?

There are a few things about this current article that raise questions with me.

First, I don't think it's correct to refer to the soul in the Buffyverse as "incorporeal." It seems to me that if you can say where a soul is physically located, in the body of a living person or in bottle locked in a safe, then it must be corporeal. A truly incorporeal thing, like a number, cannot be associated with any particular place.

About "ether," the American Heritage Dictionary gives several definitions, but the one that seems relevant here is: "The element believed in ancient and medieval civilizations to fill all space above the sphere of the moon and to compose the stars and planets." The "ether" is not an "unknown plane." It's a place, although a large one, and not empty. Apparently Liam's soul was banished to this off world location while Angelus occupied his body. It's unclear what degree of organization his soul retained. In my mind, I picture his soul broken up into many tiny pieces floating in the ether like a cloud, unable to think or act, until Gypsy magic gathered it together, restored its function, and replaced it in Angel's body.

When Angel lost his soul in Season 2, remember that the Judge could not burn him. His soul was really gone, totally absent. I assume the same was true during the 135 years of Angelus' first occupation. If so, his soul would've been entirely unaware of what Angelus was doing, and have no means at hand to influence his actions.

A sidelight: it seems that human souls are stronger than demonic spirits. Whenever the two cohabit, the human soul is in charge. Is there any exception? Let me know if there is.

Another thing. It's good to remind ourselves now and then that we're talking about fiction. The Buffy Saga is not very sophisticated about souls or the afterlife, nor is it always consistent. There is no real need to worry these issues unless it helps tell a story. Is it permissable to say that in a wiki page?

Zhandele 19:34, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

"Incorporeal" means something different than matter, like "energy". Human souls being stronger than demon spirits is not the rule. Souled Angel and Spike act human because they choose to, unlike Marcus Roscoe in Angel's body, who is like any vampire. Also, Jenny when she was possessed by Eyghon.

Also "soul" and "spirit" seem different in the Buffyverse. Jenoff the soul sucker, for instance, drains the soul but also kills the vicimt (if human). Marcus Roscoe and Angel exchanged spirits (not only their human souls but their memories). And Kathy was slowly draining Buffy's soul, making her act violent and paranoid, but she retained her memories.--Gonzalo84 20:00, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Soul, Ether

I don't see anything about "the soul," as portrayed in the Buffyverse, that would make me think it's not matter. What I see in that bottle, what passes from Buffy's mouth to Kathy's, looks like matter to me. It seems to be some kind of fluid, gas or liquid, but that's still matter. What is your reason for thinking it is not matter?

By the way, I think you need another example. It happens that matter and energy are the same thing, e = mc^2, remember?

I still think the human soul must be stronger. Angel's body contains both a human soul and a demon "spirit," if that's the word you want to use. The demon spirit is there always, and it wants to kill, but it can't because the soul prevents it. That's why Buffy in Season 5 feels it is safe to remove Spike's chip, him being "soul-having and all."

You mentioned Eygghon (sp?) Remember Willow tricked Eygghon into entering Angel's body. His soul, being trained by a century of battle against a vampiric demon, is able to overcome Eygghon. Willow declares, "winner and still champion."

Marcus Roscoe? He was a bad person, but still a person. When he controlled Angel's body, that body did what Marcus wanted it to do, chiefly to chase women. It did not do what Angelus wanted, which was to kill and torture people. The human soul was still in charge, and superior to the vampiric demon.

Let's keep this up. I haven't had so much fun in weeks.

Zhandele 00:25, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Eyghon is destroyed by Angel's inner demon, not by the human soul (Angel says "I've had a demon inside me for a couple hundred years just waiting for a good fight"). As for Angel/Angelus dichotomy, in Pylea we see what the inner demon is, a bloodthirsty beast. Angelus' talent for cruelty, his artistic sadism comes from his human side (remember "Amends")). The demon adds the bloodlust.

When Angel and Marcus exchange bodies, the demon (the bloodlust, the instinct) remains in the original body, but the "Angelus" persona is gone. Why? because part of what composes Angelus (Liam's memories, feelings, experiences) are not in that body.. My point is that the "soul" is not a mystical chain for the demon. Angel has the potential to go either way and his CHOICE what matter. That's why W&H want him corrupted. They want to corrupt his human soul.

The best analysis for "soul"/"spirit"/"life force" and all those concepts, can be found here: All things philosophical on BtVS/AtS --Gonzalo84 06:59, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Corporeal/incorporeal entities

Ethros demon, Eyghon, both in "spirit form" can take possession, and are also referred as "incorporeal", though they have limited dimensions and can be confined in bodies or boxes. The Thesulac demon also haunts a specific, limited area. They are incorporeal (composed of energy or matter is irrelevant/ i guess that they are made of "light") because they exist in an intangible state, can't be touched/smelled--Gonzalo84 07:02, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Soul/Ether

It sounds like you've conceded that the soul in the Buffyverse is material, and that "the ether" is not an "unknown plane" but a place in the heavens.

You do say much that puzzles me, though. You say that the "artistic cruelty" of Angelus comes from his human side? Where do you get that? Do we ever see Angel, not Angelus, behave cruelly? Don't we have Wesley's testimony that he's "noble and good"? You mentioned Amends. Here's what Angel says, from the script: "Because I wanted to! Because I want you so badly, I want to take comfort in you and I know it'll cost me my soul and a part of me doesn't care. I'm weak. I've never been anything else. It's not the demon in me that needs killing, Buffy. It's the man." Angel at this moment thinks he should die because he is weak, not because he is cruel.


You said it is "Angel's choice" that matters. But who makes the choice? Is it the human soul, or the demon Angelus? We see the same body being used in very different ways depending on whether there is a soul in it or not. I figure that when there is a soul there, it's in charge and it makes the choices. If the soul is Angel's, it makes good choices. If the soul is Roscoe's, it makes bad choices. If the soul gets to make the choices, "be the decider," then it has the power. That's what having power means.

That line in "Dark Age," I did understand a little differently than you did. The demon hasn't had a good fight in 130 years or so because it couldn't fight the soul that was occupying its body. Angel used the power of that demon against Eyghon, just as he often does in fights when the demon face comes out.

I have a few referencers in mind that I can't find right now, maybe you can. When Buffy makes the decision to have Spike's chip removed, she says something like, "he has a soul now, that's what's going to restrain him." Also, I'm pretty sure Angelus has something to say, somewhere, about how unpleasant it was for him when the soul was there. I'm rewatching the series, I'll find it sooner or later.

Zhandele 15:11, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Angelus is not just the demon, the "Angelus" identity is the demonic bloodlust (the beast) that has replaced the "consciousness" (the soul) combined with Liam's experiencies, the trauma of his father's disaproval that haunts him as well as his constand need for self gratification. His father berated Liam all his life, telling him that he would be a loser and he would never achieve anything. After he's turned into a vampire, Liam (who hasn't even taken the name Angelus) sets out to prove his father wrong. Darla says it herself, "Your victory over him took but moments -- But his defeat of you will last lifetimes." That's what pushes him towards becoming the most sadistic vampire ever recorded, both the "demon" part of his psyche, which drives him to feed and kill (basic needs), but to turn Drusilla crazy, sire Holtz's daughter, nail puppies to doornobs, stalk Buffy, sire Theresa, and leave Jenny dead on Giles' bed, destroy the world, all that comes from Angelus' need to be the best. "What we once were informs all that we have become".

In Angel Season 4 they explore the dichotomy to the point to separate the two sides almost like split personality. But check out Buffy Season 2, also The Prodigal and the Pylea mini-arc.

Also, Angel behaving cruelly? Season 3: Enemies. Angel pretends to have lost his soul. He did such a good job at being cruel that he fooled Faith and the Mayor, and even Buffy got disturbed. Angel after firing Cordy, Wes and Gunn. He was obssessed, and the way he threatened Lilah.

About the "soul restraining". I don't think the soul is stronger as in having more "muscle". Its the psychological effects of having a soul that "restrains" Angel or Spike. But despite having souls they could very well do evil and not care. That's what W&H wants, to corrupt the ensouled Angel so he will become like the rest of the Circle of the Black Thorn. Having a soul is not a warrant of being good. Holland, Lilah, Linwood, all of them have souls but they are evil.

About Angel "using the power of the demon", is not as if he turns a switch or a control remote. All (or most) vamps turn into vamp face to fight. Like lions baring their teeth and roaring, bloating toads or hissing snakes.

As for the Ether. I always believed the Ether to be some kind of dimensional limbo, not the air.

I really recomend you checking out ATPOBTVS.com 'cause it really clears a lot of stuff. Speculation is minimal and conclussions come from the show itself.--Gonzalo84 05:12, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Soul/Ether, ATPOBtVS

I do check All Things Philosophical, I've read portions of it and posted on it. There doesn't seem to be much action on it these days. The latest date I find on it, other than the discussion board, is 10/31/09. Maybe I just haven't figured out how to use it.


I'm seriously considering attending their meetup in Flagstaff, even though it's not very convenient for me.


I have to say that what you said about Angel's cruelty didn't convince me. Your examples were mostly things done by Angelus, or by Angel pretending to be Angelus. The only exception I recall was the threat to Lilah. That doesn't seem cruel to me at all. It was professional. He felt an obligation to protect his people, Cordelia in this case, and he did what was necessary to protect them. If he had done anything less, I would've lost respect for him.


If you wish to prove that Angelus' cruelty comes from his human side, I think you'd have to show that Liam was a cruel person before he was turned, so that his cruelty carried over into the vampire later called Angelus. We don't see much of Liam before Darla killed him, but I don't remember anything that would make me think he was cruel. I'd describe him as feckless. His father may not have handled him in the best possible way, but I certainly don't blame him (the father) for putting some pressure on his son. Actually, Liam would've been a better person, in some ways, if he had a cruel streak. Cruelty requires a sense of purpose and direction, which Liam seemed to lack.


Here's a thought experiment. Suppose Liam had lived, but acquired some other form of power, not vampiric. Suppose he'd acquired a large fortune somehow, or become the favorite of some powerful person. Would he have attacked his father in some way, found a way to ruin him financially, perhaps? I don't think so. What do you think? And what about Liam's little sister, whom he seemed to love. Would Liam have been cruel to her? Angelus killed her, remember.


As for the ether, that seems very cut and dried to me. I think there are only two other dimensions in the Buffyverse that are named: Quar'toth and Pylea. If you know more, please correct me. Notice that both these names are peculiar. They don't resemble any familiar English words, or any words in any human language I know anything about. They seem to come from languages of some other world. But "ether" is a familiar English word. If the writers chose it, they must've intended us to understand it in terms of its meaning in other contexts. What does it mean in other contexts?


The meaning I cited, the substance of the high heavens according to ancient and pre-scientific beliefs, is actually the root meaning. There are two other meanings that are more in current use. First, ether is a volatile organic compound, liquid at room temperature but liable to evaporate quickly, the vapors of which will put a person to sleep. Second, ether is the name picked by Clerk Maxwell for the substance he thought propagated electromagnetic waves (he knew that light could cross a vacuum, but he couldn't picture a wave without anything waving; he used the word ether to describe a "something" so subtle that we couldn't detect it, except for the fact that it carried light waves). "Ether" means an extra-airy kind of air. There's no help for it.


All for now. Perhaps I'll see you in Flagstaff.


Zhandele 02:11, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

I never said that Liam was cruel, but sometimes the demon perverts the original persona, Liam loved his sister and had issues with his father. This issues carry on as a vampire (because he remembers) so the only way to deal with these memories is the way he did. Another example: Spike, freshly raised as a vampire, sires his mother. William the Bloody loved his mother, and this loved carried on into undeath, though twisted by the demon.--Gonzalo84 04:52, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Liam

The idea that Liam had a cruel streak in him, before he was turned, is actually something I'd like to believe. It would make the character more interesting, and the behavior of Angel/Angelus more understandable. In the little that we see of Liam, there is no evidence for it that I can see, but maybe if we had more stories ... We do need more stories, you know.

Apparently (I'm referring to the whole discussion now) you're looking at the Angel character in a more metaphorical way than I am. That's ironic, because my thinking is usually very much on the metaphorical side. For instance, if you think of Angel as literally "a vampire with a soul," then he is one body with two competing personalities, each relatively simple, where "the soul," which is the relatively good personality, is always in control when it is present, and it is always present unless it is removed in some magical way. On the other hand, if you think of Angel as a metaphor for a guilt-ridden man, then of course you'll want to see one single personality that is more complex. If we want to get the most out of the Buffy saga, we must think in both ways at once. The sort of questions that come out of this dual thinking are good to think about (why?), but may never find answers.

I think I will post something like this on ATPBtVS. That's probably a better place to talk about it. On that site, I call myself MidwesternWatcher.

I tend to see Angel as a former junkie struggling with addiction and the promise of forgiveness.--Gonzalo84 21:42, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.