Why Spike getting his soul back shouldn't stop Buffy killing vampires.

[elisi]

A lot of people have been discussing whether Spike's soulquest means that all vampires are potentially redeemable in AOQ's review threads. Having written down my thoughts, I thought I might re-post them

Comments

[frenchani]

Spike is just the exception that makes the rule. Even William's lovely mother behaved agaisnt her sweet nature once she was turned. LMPTM pointed out how special Spike was, he remained a fool sentimental, a fool for love. He was evil but at the same time he was still driven by his heart above all, whereas vampires are mostly driven by bloodlust and "revenge". In "Lie To Me", Buffy's instinct was right when she threatened Dru.
Spike could even still feel empathy as "Tough Love" showed (towards Dawn)whereas vampires are basically self-centred, deceitful and selfish creatures. He was a true anomaly because he kept the potential to become a good man again while he was evil.

[elisi]

::nods::

'Lie To Me' is pivotal - because it shows so clearly that Spike prizes love above all else, even killing a Slayer. Compare and contrast with Angelus/Darla who happily left each other to die! (Not that Angelus/Dru didn't have very strong bonds, but self-preservation came first.)

[aycheb]

I completely agree with all your points. A lot of these arguments also seem to be based on the impression that Buffy routinely stakes "innocent" vampires i.e. ones that aren't doing anything bad at the time and presumably might be just about to redeem themselves. However, I think the show generally makes it clear than when she does that sort of thing it's an aberration. When she and Faith make a daytime raid on nest of sleeping vamps in Bad Girls, or when she hunts down a fleeing vamp in Buffy vs Dracula or when she takes out the junkie vamp girl who'd been servicing Riley these actions are all clearly set up by the story as Not-Good-Or-At-Best-Dubious-Things. For non-morally ambiguous slays it looks more as if Buffy's policy is to go for vamps that are coming on aggressively towards her - even the newly risen/rising ones are shown to be growling at her or in game face. When she lets the nesting poofter vamps run off in Crush there's absolutely no indication by the show that this represents a dereliction of duty.

[elisi]

Buffy routinely stakes "innocent" vampires i.e. ones that aren't doing anything bad at the time and presumably might be just about to redeem themselves.
Re-watching S7 I think they deal with this at the very start of 'Lessons' where Buffy is teaching Dawn. The vampire is stuck in the ground and very politely asks Buffy to help him up. A second later he thanks her by trying to eat her - the lesson being: 'Vampires are *always* evil, even when they look helpless'.

When she lets the nesting poofter vamps run off in Crush there's absolutely no indication by the show that this represents a dereliction of duty.
Well... according to some people it does! But yeah, Buffy tends to let the pathetic/harmless ones (mostly demons generally) hang around.

[bogwitch]

Arguing for the rights of potentially redeemed vampires is very dangerous thinking. What about all the people who would die 'just in case' vampires could be good? It's like not imprisioning criminals because they might stop of their own accord.

I'm not sure I agree with your #3, or maybe just the way you phrased it. You said that his reasons are complex, but I think a choice to be good [a man] was in there. It's all part and parcel of wanting be be a fit mate for Buffy, though it's muddied with a few less altruistic reasons, but he doesn't want to be the person he was anymore. William is a safe answer to that.

[elisi]

It's like not imprisioning criminals because they might stop of their own accord.
Ah, now that's a good analogy. Thank you. And yes I think it's dangerous thinking too - as I pointed out, Spike never tried to save any other vampires. And he should know.

Re. #3, then I've altered it slightly - this was originally written as a reply to someone who thinks Spike went to Africa to get the chip out so he could punish Buffy for dumping him. It's not easy to talk to such people.

[rahirah]

I always thought that the "Oh noes, if all vampires are potentially redeemable, Buffy is a murderer!" argument was a straw man. But a lot of people are wedded to it.

[elisi]

Oh yes, this is a straw man alright! The guy I'm 'discussing' this with is one of the 'Spike was tricked into the soul' crowd. I thought that suddenly being so concerned about soulless evil things was rather odd and asked him if he'd changed his mind. (According to him vampires can't change, not even Spike, so why did he bother discussing it?) He replied that Joss implying that evil vampires *could* change was one of those things that ruined the show. *shrug*

(He also has no sense of humour. It's tragic really.)

[mikeygs]

Vampires are intrinsically evil. I really don't think the story ever contradicted that at all.

[elisi]

Except to people like this guy. But then he lost all respect for Buffy when she smiled at Spike's joke about killing her friends in 'Flooded'. It's really, really hard not to bang my head into the wall repeatedly!