Did the World Shake When You Were Redeemed?
Thanks for keeping me entertained while housesitting, guys. There were a bunch of insightful and interesting responses to my last entry. I didn't even bother replying to comments because I felt like keeping my own opinion to myself on this one and just seeing what others thought. Definitely some interesting stuff there.
I'm also not surprised that I'm in the minority on this one. Well, that seems to be a pattern with me. :)
Now I'm gonna take the mic and explain my strangely literal opinion that very few people will agree with.
In answer to the question: "Does Spike need a soul to be redeemed?", I initially chose "No". I changed that to "Other" on the poll when I realized that I would have to make some stipulations on my answer. However, generally, my answer is "No".
Here's where I get hung up, and this is something rahirah brought up in her comment, but what do we (or the show) mean by "redemption"? At what point is Spike redeemed?
When he feels guilt for things he did in the past? Well, he feels some form of remorse after the AR of Seeing Red. So you might well say that Spike was redeemed by the act of going to get his soul.
Is he redeemed when he does good things? He does plenty of good things in S5. He even does good things all the way back to S2, when he allied with Buffy at the end of the season. His actions were selfishly motivated, but that doesn't change the act, themselves.
Is he redeemed when his good deeds hold more weight than his past crimes? Well, he'll probably never be redeemed. He spent a long time as a very evil creature. I don't know that that can be redeemed if we're going by those terms.
None of those are really used to judge Spike's redemption among fans, though. Instead, the common thought seems to be that he needs to do good without selfish motive in order to be redeemed.
Well, pause there. Call me a cynic, but I'm one of those annoying people that doesn't believe there's any such thing as a true altruistic act. Every action taken has some benefit to the person doing it, even if it's a warm fuzzy feeling. And when we're talking about love, as the subject came up in the comments, even romantic human love is an inherently selfish emotion. Somebody doing good deeds "for love" doesn't diminish the value of those deeds. It's as good a reason to do good as any, really.
However, what most people seem to really mean is that Spike needs to do good with the full awareness of what "good" is to be redeemed.
And that's basically where I disagree with the crowd.
I know that the soul is a vague entity in the Buffyverse. Indeed, it came up in the comments that we're never really told what it's all about. However, if you've read any of my past meta on the subject, you'll know that I tend to view the soul as a moral compass.
So it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say Spike is "morally handicapped" without a soul. He doesn't have the understanding of "right" and "wrong" and, instead, relies on an external compass in the form of Buffy (See what happens in S6 when his external compass goes astray).
So, no, a soulless Spike would never be able to do good with a full understanding of what he's doing. By that definition of "redemption", he would need the soul to be redeemed.
I have a different take on redemption, though.
Redemption is trying. Seeking the good, whatever the reason, even if you don't understand why. Going against your nature for years while others try to discourage you.
I've changed my mind on this particular issue over the past year as I've thought about it. I don't think you can point to any one scene and say, "Look there! He's redeemed now!" Redemption is a journey. And it's one that Spike started before he got his soul.
Now, without a soul, Spike would still never have that awareness necessary to know exactly why some things are "good" and others are "bad". His identity issues would still be present, but I consider that completely irrelevant to his redemption. Redemption is when Spike turns his back on evil to try to be good. It has nothing to do with his sense of self. There seems to be a tendency to conflate the two issues.
Was the soul completely necessary for redemption? Honestly, I don't think so in the right circumstances. In a completely AU show, where Spike was recognized for his good acts instead of being regarded as "only" a soulless demon, he could well have utilized that external moral guide that Buffy provided him with to play for the good guys. Even past her death, I think her memory would keep him sufficiently motivated, him being the romantic guy he is (We see this at least partly in the interim between S5 and S6).
That being said, I'm looking at this from a completely out-of-context point of view, defining terms and all that shit. I do want to mention that, thematically, I do think that Spike's soul was important for redemption. That is, in this show, with the characters being the way they are and events playing out as they had, that Spike had to get a soul to continue with his redemption.
deird1 had a wonderful comment that summed this aspect up, and I hope she doesn't mind if I quote it here (Er...if she does, I'll remove it). :)
I think the only way I can really explain this is to talk about Willow.
It is, in my opinion, essential to Willow's character that, at some point, she'll try to destroy the world. I think her character arc was always leading up to that, and if that's not there... she's just not Willow.
Not that I have a problem with fics putting the world-destroyage later, or earlier, or making it completely different, but, looking at Willow's character, it's always something she's going to end up doing at some point.
Same with Spike, for me.
I think he was always going to end up falling for Buffy, fighting evil, and winning his soul. It is, for me, an essential part of who he is - not having the soul (he's still Spike, with or without it), but being someone who will end up getting a soul.
Take that away, and he's not Spike anymore.
So there you go. Thematically, yeah he had to get a soul. Out of context of the show, though, I think it would be possible for Spike to be a force for good without one. And now...everybody rushes to disagree with me.
I'm also not surprised that I'm in the minority on this one. Well, that seems to be a pattern with me. :)
Now I'm gonna take the mic and explain my strangely literal opinion that very few people will agree with.
In answer to the question: "Does Spike need a soul to be redeemed?", I initially chose "No". I changed that to "Other" on the poll when I realized that I would have to make some stipulations on my answer. However, generally, my answer is "No".
Here's where I get hung up, and this is something rahirah brought up in her comment, but what do we (or the show) mean by "redemption"? At what point is Spike redeemed?
When he feels guilt for things he did in the past? Well, he feels some form of remorse after the AR of Seeing Red. So you might well say that Spike was redeemed by the act of going to get his soul.
Is he redeemed when he does good things? He does plenty of good things in S5. He even does good things all the way back to S2, when he allied with Buffy at the end of the season. His actions were selfishly motivated, but that doesn't change the act, themselves.
Is he redeemed when his good deeds hold more weight than his past crimes? Well, he'll probably never be redeemed. He spent a long time as a very evil creature. I don't know that that can be redeemed if we're going by those terms.
None of those are really used to judge Spike's redemption among fans, though. Instead, the common thought seems to be that he needs to do good without selfish motive in order to be redeemed.
Well, pause there. Call me a cynic, but I'm one of those annoying people that doesn't believe there's any such thing as a true altruistic act. Every action taken has some benefit to the person doing it, even if it's a warm fuzzy feeling. And when we're talking about love, as the subject came up in the comments, even romantic human love is an inherently selfish emotion. Somebody doing good deeds "for love" doesn't diminish the value of those deeds. It's as good a reason to do good as any, really.
However, what most people seem to really mean is that Spike needs to do good with the full awareness of what "good" is to be redeemed.
And that's basically where I disagree with the crowd.
I know that the soul is a vague entity in the Buffyverse. Indeed, it came up in the comments that we're never really told what it's all about. However, if you've read any of my past meta on the subject, you'll know that I tend to view the soul as a moral compass.
So it wouldn't be an exaggeration to say Spike is "morally handicapped" without a soul. He doesn't have the understanding of "right" and "wrong" and, instead, relies on an external compass in the form of Buffy (See what happens in S6 when his external compass goes astray).
So, no, a soulless Spike would never be able to do good with a full understanding of what he's doing. By that definition of "redemption", he would need the soul to be redeemed.
I have a different take on redemption, though.
Redemption is trying. Seeking the good, whatever the reason, even if you don't understand why. Going against your nature for years while others try to discourage you.
I've changed my mind on this particular issue over the past year as I've thought about it. I don't think you can point to any one scene and say, "Look there! He's redeemed now!" Redemption is a journey. And it's one that Spike started before he got his soul.
Now, without a soul, Spike would still never have that awareness necessary to know exactly why some things are "good" and others are "bad". His identity issues would still be present, but I consider that completely irrelevant to his redemption. Redemption is when Spike turns his back on evil to try to be good. It has nothing to do with his sense of self. There seems to be a tendency to conflate the two issues.
Was the soul completely necessary for redemption? Honestly, I don't think so in the right circumstances. In a completely AU show, where Spike was recognized for his good acts instead of being regarded as "only" a soulless demon, he could well have utilized that external moral guide that Buffy provided him with to play for the good guys. Even past her death, I think her memory would keep him sufficiently motivated, him being the romantic guy he is (We see this at least partly in the interim between S5 and S6).
That being said, I'm looking at this from a completely out-of-context point of view, defining terms and all that shit. I do want to mention that, thematically, I do think that Spike's soul was important for redemption. That is, in this show, with the characters being the way they are and events playing out as they had, that Spike had to get a soul to continue with his redemption.
deird1 had a wonderful comment that summed this aspect up, and I hope she doesn't mind if I quote it here (Er...if she does, I'll remove it). :)
I think the only way I can really explain this is to talk about Willow.
It is, in my opinion, essential to Willow's character that, at some point, she'll try to destroy the world. I think her character arc was always leading up to that, and if that's not there... she's just not Willow.
Not that I have a problem with fics putting the world-destroyage later, or earlier, or making it completely different, but, looking at Willow's character, it's always something she's going to end up doing at some point.
Same with Spike, for me.
I think he was always going to end up falling for Buffy, fighting evil, and winning his soul. It is, for me, an essential part of who he is - not having the soul (he's still Spike, with or without it), but being someone who will end up getting a soul.
Take that away, and he's not Spike anymore.
So there you go. Thematically, yeah he had to get a soul. Out of context of the show, though, I think it would be possible for Spike to be a force for good without one. And now...everybody rushes to disagree with me.