Why Spike getting his soul back shouldn't stop Buffy killing vampires.
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.
Basically I don't find it problematic at all. Spike's circumstances were so very particular, that it's doubtful they'll ever be reproduced. So saying that Buffy should worry about staking vampires ‘because they might turn out good’ is pointless (for her anyway - such pondering is for The Council). Anyway, here’s my reasons:
1) The Initiative is gone, and Buffy has neither the means nor the time or the resources to chip vampires herself.
2) Although the chip inhibited Spike's vampire nature, he did not start doing good until he fell in love with Buffy. What if Dru had arrived at the end of S4 instead of S5? Very different outcome I think. The chip only stopped him from doing active evil - and someone like Angelus could still have caused incredible damage, even if chipped. Spike helped the bleeding disaster victims because of Buffy - and we know that if she wasn't around, the temptation (to feed) could get overwhelming.
3) Spike didn't go get his soul because he 'wanted to be good'. (Although it could be argued that in loving Buffy he was in love with goodness itself and wanted to attain that. This bit's a little muddled, sorry.) He knew that getting it might entail that goodness (becoming a 'fluffy puppy with bad teeth'), and it pissed him off royally (William the bloody awful poet not someone he welcomed). He was pretty much committing demonic suicide (and choosing to be 'Uncle Tom', like he once accused Angel of - not something to celebrate), and the circumstances were pretty extraordinary. He got the soul for Buffy - so he could be 'good enough' (and because he wanted to make sure he wouldn’t hurt Buffy again, and because he’d come to a dead end and couldn’t go back to being just a demon, etc, etc. Hugely complex matter! )
4) A soul doesn't make you good, it only creates a possibility. Vampires are evil, and that is where their nature will lead them. Having a soul only put Spike on the same level as ordinary humans - he could still have turned out like Warren. Look at Angel (in S2 of AtS particularly).
5) Vampires change all the time, just consider Spike and Angel and who they used to be. Liam, the boorish drunk, became Angelus - refined artist, revelling in the destruction of humans and rather pretentious. William, the soft hearted poet, became Spike, the Slayer killer and reckless fighter. Vampires change, but only once have we seen someone change towards being 'good' - and even then it was all for the sake of Buffy.
Doing the percentages, 99.99% of the vampires Buffy meets are evil fiends (who would stay that way whatever happened), and she should stake them - with Spike as the variable 0.01%. But - if Buffy had succeeded in staking Spike pre-chip she would have been perfectly justified in doing so. I would under no circumstances say that letting Spike live 'because he might turn out good' would be a sane or wise choice.
Or turning the argument on its head, some people Buffy has met are evil - should she automatically assume that every human she meets is a potential murderer? Should she sit down and quiz them or lock them up until she finds out? This is obviously ridiculous, even if Buffy is *a lot* more likely to meet an evil human than a potentially good vampire.
I know I still have comments to reply to and I hang my head in shame. I just seem to be behind on everything at the moment. *sigh*
Basically I don't find it problematic at all. Spike's circumstances were so very particular, that it's doubtful they'll ever be reproduced. So saying that Buffy should worry about staking vampires ‘because they might turn out good’ is pointless (for her anyway - such pondering is for The Council). Anyway, here’s my reasons:
1) The Initiative is gone, and Buffy has neither the means nor the time or the resources to chip vampires herself.
2) Although the chip inhibited Spike's vampire nature, he did not start doing good until he fell in love with Buffy. What if Dru had arrived at the end of S4 instead of S5? Very different outcome I think. The chip only stopped him from doing active evil - and someone like Angelus could still have caused incredible damage, even if chipped. Spike helped the bleeding disaster victims because of Buffy - and we know that if she wasn't around, the temptation (to feed) could get overwhelming.
3) Spike didn't go get his soul because he 'wanted to be good'. (Although it could be argued that in loving Buffy he was in love with goodness itself and wanted to attain that. This bit's a little muddled, sorry.) He knew that getting it might entail that goodness (becoming a 'fluffy puppy with bad teeth'), and it pissed him off royally (William the bloody awful poet not someone he welcomed). He was pretty much committing demonic suicide (and choosing to be 'Uncle Tom', like he once accused Angel of - not something to celebrate), and the circumstances were pretty extraordinary. He got the soul for Buffy - so he could be 'good enough' (and because he wanted to make sure he wouldn’t hurt Buffy again, and because he’d come to a dead end and couldn’t go back to being just a demon, etc, etc. Hugely complex matter! )
4) A soul doesn't make you good, it only creates a possibility. Vampires are evil, and that is where their nature will lead them. Having a soul only put Spike on the same level as ordinary humans - he could still have turned out like Warren. Look at Angel (in S2 of AtS particularly).
5) Vampires change all the time, just consider Spike and Angel and who they used to be. Liam, the boorish drunk, became Angelus - refined artist, revelling in the destruction of humans and rather pretentious. William, the soft hearted poet, became Spike, the Slayer killer and reckless fighter. Vampires change, but only once have we seen someone change towards being 'good' - and even then it was all for the sake of Buffy.
Doing the percentages, 99.99% of the vampires Buffy meets are evil fiends (who would stay that way whatever happened), and she should stake them - with Spike as the variable 0.01%. But - if Buffy had succeeded in staking Spike pre-chip she would have been perfectly justified in doing so. I would under no circumstances say that letting Spike live 'because he might turn out good' would be a sane or wise choice.
Or turning the argument on its head, some people Buffy has met are evil - should she automatically assume that every human she meets is a potential murderer? Should she sit down and quiz them or lock them up until she finds out? This is obviously ridiculous, even if Buffy is *a lot* more likely to meet an evil human than a potentially good vampire.
I know I still have comments to reply to and I hang my head in shame. I just seem to be behind on everything at the moment. *sigh*