(Fic) Good for the Soul

[stormwreath]

Here's a little drabble for you. It was sparked by a discussion with 2maggie2 about the degree of Angel's culpability in Season 8, and I made the point that doing evil and being evil aren't necessarily the same thing. True, the difference might not matter much to the victims of your actions, but they probably would matter to your confessor. Assuming Angel

Comments

[frogfarm]

Just once or twice is good for your soul
If you don't stop, you lose control

AKA "One death is a tragedy. One million is a statistic."

[stormwreath]

But Angel remembers Every. Single. One!!! (anguished howl)
/amends

[frogfarm]

Yeah, past the point of ridiculousness (wherever that happens to be on your personal line), it becomes rather farcical, and amusing in a more than dark or ironic sense. Or in the sense that in the case of R. Scott Bakker's fiction, GWAR did it first and funnier.

[velvetwhip]

You get about 5000 cool points for quoting Oingo Boingo.

Gabrielle

[norwie2010]

Perhaps a more nuanced discussion is possible on your LJ? (BF is like a pit of... something that lives in a pit, sometimes.)

[stormwreath]

Well, if people want to post discussion/comments/thoughts against my review posts of each issue, they're welcome. There used to be a lot more discussion here back in the early days of S8, but a lot of the LJ crowd got alienated from the comics and dropped out. Buffyforum may be a pit of voles at times, but at least it's pretty lively and active.

[norwie2010]

against your review?

That's not what i meant. (Or maybe yes?)

I just think that a lot of (good) debate/discussion is shot to hell on BF by trolls.

I think your comment about figureheads/scapegoats is a really good one. (In fact, i think it is your one good argument. :-P )

And.. well, it is complicated (darn, why is life not simple?). For me, the question is not "irredeemable", or "punishment".

For me, the question is where do I draw the line? Behind that line, it is not if someone can be rehabilitated: I think everybody can be. It is: Do we devote resources to the rehabilitation of someone vs. devoting those resources to make this world a better place? (And, as a distant: how are the circumstances that a person will lapse and are we willing to bear the consequences?)

[stormwreath]

That was "against" in the sense of "next to", as in the phrase "put a tick against someone's name", or even "the shovel is leaning against the wall". Not "opposed to". :)

I have two issues with BF: one, a lot of people have a really obvious Agenda that colours everything they say. But then, they might be saying the same thing about me, especially lately. Second, the atmosphere does seem to get more confrontational and vicious sometimes, and it's easy to get sucked in and reply in kind. LJ is more laid back because there's the sense you're entering someone's private space when you comment, so you need to be on your best behaviour. (There may also be issues of gender-biased communication strategies going on too.)

Behind that line, it is not if someone can be rehabilitated: I think everybody can be. It is: Do we devote resources to the rehabilitation of someone vs. devoting those resources to make this world a better place?It's a fair question, but in terms of A&F the only person "devoting resources" is Faith, and it's openly

[mr_waterproof]

What would the position of the Roman Catholic Church be on taking confession from vampires, given that they don't usually have souls? From you drabble it doesn't seem this priest knows about Angel's special circumstances.

[stormwreath]

Depends on whether you believe that the RCC in the Buffyverse knows all about vampires and has formal policies on them, or if they're as ignorant as the generality of the human race. (With the obvious exception of the Vatican's secret corps of blind albino assassins, obviously. They would know all about the supernatural.)

In this case, I'm assuming the priest is decent-but-ignorant, and will take the line that if a vampire seeks confession, God will know his true heart and grant forgiveness if it's justified. Of course, if he tells Angel to say the rosary as penance and Angel's hands catch fire when he touches it, that might make him have doubts... :)

[bluemage55]

Depends on whether you believe that the RCC in the Buffyverse knows all about vampires and has formal policies on them, or if they're as ignorant as the generality of the human race.

I've Got You Under My Skin suggests that at least some members of the RCC are aware of the supernatural, and the fact that Catholic exorcism appears effective implies the RCC has some (at least past) expertise in dealing with the supernatural.

Formal confesesion policies for vampires might be pushing it a little bit though.

[stormwreath]

The idea that seems most likely to me is that the RCC does have sub-organisations which know about the supernatural - I created the Holy Order of St Michael for one of my fics, as an opponent of the Watchers' Council - but the Church as a whole, and the vast majority of its members, are as ignorant of the supernatural as the rest of the Buffyverse.

[eilowyn]

Do you have linkage for the BF debate? Anyway, laughed at the drabble. Always knew Angel was quite the good Catholic boy.

[stormwreath]

It's going on all over the place over there, but the specific post I made was here:
http://www.buffyforums.net/forums/showpost.php?p=581268&postcount=683
And I quote/link to maggie's post within it.

Thanks!

[stormwreath]

For me, intention is key to the moral issue, although I accept that the practical issue is also important. (The practical issue being, if someone is criminally insane then it may be unfair to blame them, morally, for crimes they commit since they're mentally unable to distinguish right from wrong. But I'd still have no hesitation in locking them up to protect public safety. And that includes the vampire who's a repeat serial killer, however remorseful he may be about it later