Anti-Feminist Interpretation of Spike's Redemption Arc and Buffy/Spike

[itsnotmymind]

I've been read reading posts in gabrielleabelle's livejournal. I've had a particular interest lately in her feminist posts, such as The Feminist Filter, wherein gabrielleabelle and her friends analyze each episode of Buffy from a feminist perspective (unfortunately, it only gets as far as the S7 episode Homecoming, since gabs has left the fandom). These posts are absolutely awesome, and you should check them out if you haven't before.

However, when I read the comments on the posts, there is a definite Spike bias. Spike gets a lot of praise, Xander and Angel get a lot of criticism. This is understandable. The vast majority of the posters on gab's lj are/were Spike fans, and Buffy/Spike shippers. We all have our biases. Furthermore, there was some very intelligent criticism of Spike from Spike fans, and there were some very vocal fans who stepped in to defend Xander and Angel. Sometimes to the point of distracting from the feminist intention of the series. Still, the overall bias was there.

This got me thinking. What are the feminist aspects of Angel and Xander and their arcs? What are the anti-feminist aspects of Spike and his arcs?

This post isn't about Angel and Xander. It's about Spike. It's basically an anti-feminist interpretation of his redemption arc and relationship with Buffy. This has been done before, of course--there are plenty of fans out there who hate that Spike was redeemed, and can't stand Buffy/Spike. Nonetheless, I wanted to do it myself as a thought experiment.


I think the interpretation I'm laying out below is a legitimate interpretation of Spike's arc in the last three seasons of Buffy. I certainly don't think it's the only interpretation. But I think it's there.

In this analysis, I'm certainly not going to deny that there are feminist and gender-swappy elements to Spike's arc. To do so would be dishonest. Every storyline on Buffy has feminist elements, and Buffy/Spike in my book wins for gender swappy. That is one of the reasons I like it so much. But I think there is an argument to be made for Spike's overall arc from BtVS S5 to BtVS S7 as anti-feminist.

When Spike first falls in love with Buffy in S5 he perceives himself as a dogged "nice guy". "What's it take?" he grumbles in Triangle when Buffy is not by impressed by him refraining from feeding off off injured people. He firmly believes that getting Buffy to love him is simply a matter of jumping through hoops. The idea that she might not be obligated to eventually fall for him is not on his radar. In his quest for Buffy's feelings, he stalks her, threatens to sick his vampiric ex on her, and, eventually, tries to rape her.

At first, the Scoobies, with the exception of Dawn but including Buffy, are entirely disgusted with Spike. Giles tells him, "We are not your way to Buffy. There is no way to Buffy." Spike is portrayed sympathetically (see: Fool for Love), but his point of view is not, initially, endorsed by the narrative.

From Intervention through early S6, things change. Spike shows himself capable of selfless acts. He tells Buffy he knows she'll never love him--a strong contrast to his insistence in Crush that he knows she she has feelings for him.

Pathetic stalker Spike has been replaced by noble knight Spike. Perhaps the implication is that Spike's stalker behavior was caused by his vampiric nature, while late S5 Spike is returning to his noble human nature. In a fantasy world, this makes sense. From a real world, this is problematic. Certainly, human beings are complicated, and someone in real life can be both abusive and noble. But the extent of Spike's nobility seems like a romanticization of the very "love" that he expressed earlier with stalking and a death threat. It's an engaging story--but it's not very feminist.

S6 is a wonderful subversion of the entire relationship. Spike finally gets what he wants--sex with Buffy. But she denies him any emotional connection, uses him, and abuses him. The creep factor of Spike's feelings for Buffy never goes away (see, for example, the balcony scene in Dead Things). Spike's feelings during their sexual relationship, while generally treated sympathetically, are not romanticized.

The season end with Spike regaining his soul by choice--and undergoing trials in order to do so. Spike's exact motivations for choosing to regain his soul are much-debated in fandom. We have this quote from Spike, though: "So you'll give me what I want. Make me what I was. So Buffy can get what she deserves." He does it for Buffy. Out of that same love that caused him to try to rape her.

Again, I find this to be a very powerful story. The idea that the exact same emotion could cause such wildly opposing actions draws me in. The fact that Spike has to pass trials in order to regain his soul is reminiscent of the trials Angel faces to save Darla in the AtS episode The Trial. Angel's deep love for Darla is enough to convince her to choose to die human--to not become a soulless monster again. Spike's trials, again, are strongly associated with love--the love for Buffy that turns him from monster to man.

Let's look at this from a feminist perspective.

As with S5, we see Spike engaging in disturbing violence towards Buffy, and then doing something hugely heroic for her. Again, I think it's important to remember that real people do things like this, too. The ambiguity of Spike's reasons for getting a soul--and the initial ambiguity as to whether Spike was trying to get a soul or get his chip removed--tones down the romanticism. But from a doylist sense, this is the end of the season. The very end. The last thing we see is Spike receiving his soul. I know, I know, it's a great ending. But it very clearly shows how loving a good woman can change a man. Spike, at this point, is still convinced that if he jumps through hoops x, y, and z, Buffy will love him. That's not the sole of Spike's motivation--he says, "So Buffy can get what she deserves". He cares about her well-being. But there's still the jumping through hoops aspect.

Ultimately, I would say that as of the end of this episode, there's a lot of possibilities as to how the story could end. The means the feminism of the story is open-ended.

In S7, Spike's perception of himself as a dogged "nice guy" is basically gone. Spike in Beneath You talks about getting his soul so he would be loved--jumping through hoops again--but I'm not quite sure if he's referring to the motivations of his soulless self, or if he still feels that way. For most of S7, Spike feels undeserving of Buffy's love.

However, in the context of Spike's greater arc, Chosen is very problematic.

Before we get there, let's talk a bit about Spike's non-Buffy and non-Scooby victims.

Soulless, non-chipped Spike was in Sunnydale in S2, S3, and S4. We see him kill onscreen in S2 and S3--I can't remember if he killed onscreen in S4 or not, but in S2 and S4 in particular, he almost certainly killed offscreen. That's a fair amount of dead people. Sunnydale is, at least in theory, a small town. Yet from Spike's chipping in S4 until the end of the series, the Scoobies never once encounter a loved one of the people he killed in Sunnydale.

In fact, soulless, chipped Spike never encounters any family or friends of anyone he killed. That would interfere with his staircase redemption* story, wouldn't it?

The only loved one of someone Spike kills that Spike actually encounters is Robin Wood. This is, of course, post-soul. By which point Spike does remorse.

...In theory.

"I don't give a piss about your mum. She was a slayer. I was a vampire. That's the way the game is played."

Yeah, I can't even.

Now, I do think Spike would have reacted differently if a loved one of less a powerful victim (say, one of those teenage girls he did unspeakable things to) had tried to kill him. That's not to say that killing a hero and leaving her kid without any parents isn't horrible--just that in another situation I do think Spike would have expressed remorse.

But on a Doylist level, this is literally the only time we see Spike confront a loved one of someone he personally killed. And that's how he reacts.

So, Chosen. Spike dies--and gets a very sparkly heroic death. A champion. I outlined above some of the complications with Spike's story from slayer of slayers to champion, but that's not directly relevant to this meta. What's relevant is that Buffy tells him she loves him.

Now, Buffy is entitled to have whatever feelings she wants about Spike. And I do love this scene. But the way it plays out in terms of the larger arc is the dogged "nice guy" trope. Spike has jumped through all his hoops, and his reward is that Buffy loves him. In a way this was inevitable, if not from Out of My Mind onward, than at least Fool for Love. He loves her soooooo much that, eventually, she has to love him back. Buffy's love is, ultimately, his reward for good behavior.

On a Watsonian level, there's a lot of debate about why Buffy told him she loved him, and whether she meant it or not. I think she meant it--but I also think that part of the reason she said it at the moment was as a reward of sorts. He had done so much for her that she wanted to give him something back. So while obviously this part is open to a great deal of debate, I think that the "reward" aspect of that line is both Watsonian and Doylist.

Then, Spike tells her she doesn't mean it.

Okay, telling someone their feelings is really rude and condescending. There's probably a lot of gender issues woven into to, but I'm not going to analyse that at the moment. I'm am going to point out that Spike has a long history of telling Buffy her feelings, starting with Fool for Love at the latest ("Come on. I can feel it, Slayer. You know you want to dance."), and culminating in the attempted rape in Seeing Red, where he tries to force himself on an obviously upset Buffy while insisting that despite what she has said repeatedly, she does love him.

But this time, he says she doesn't mean it, so now he's the noble hero. Even though it's actually part of the same pattern of behavior.

Finally, Buffy's last word on the series is "Spike." Now, there's obviously a lot more going on with Buffy at the end of Chosen than her relationship with Spike. Not being the only slayer anymore being one huge example. But I'm a symbols and patterns girl--and I do think the fact that her last word is the name of male character is kinda...problematic for a show that's supposed to be about empowering women. It's not that her male love interests can't be important her--but the last word she says on the show?

There are certainly feminist aspects to Spike's overall arc, but there are some very not-feminist interpretations. It's a redemption arc where a lovesick male character is ultimately rewarded with female affection. The portrayal of Spike's feelings for Buffy is complicated--just as real people are complicated--but ultimately, the positive aspects of Spike's love are romanticized to a disturbing extent. I saw a discussion of the Jessica Jones TV show where someone found some fanfic descriptions that paired Jessica with her creepy stalker. They expressed horror that these stories existed. I read the descriptions of the fanfiction, and none of them bothered me. They all seemed to be well away that Kilgrave (the stalker) was a horrible person, and that any consensual relationship between him and Jessica would be beyond creepy. There weren't fic I'd necessarily want to read, but based on the descriptions they don't seem to in any way downplay, excuse, or romanticize stalking. Compare that to many Spuffy fics (and Bangel fics, but that's not the point of this meta).

So yes, I think Spike's arc is questionable from a feminist perspective. And I hope to have done a good job of doing something that we in fandom all know we must do, but still always find difficult: Criticizing something I love.

*Staircase redemption: I refer to Spike's redemption as a "staircase redemption" because of the way he becomes "good" step by step. As opposed to Angel's light switch redemption. Yes, AtS S2 in particular really complicates the "light switch" aspect of Angel's redemption story, but I still refer to it as a light switch redemption because it cracks me up it's treated that way much of the time.

Comments

[kikimay]

Interesting discussion!

You raise some excellent points. I especially agree on the whole Robin and Nikki's deal. I just can't wrap my mind around that "fuck it, your mom was a slayer and she never loved you" speech. Aaarrgh.

Anyway, interpretion is about one's point of view. There's no right or wrong and it changes for everyone. We could argue that feminism is the same, in a way. While "feminism" in general is just one thing: equality between the sexes - and I'm gonna stand for it - inside a narrative we see stuff happen and we can argue that they are both feminist or anti-feminist for different reasons. Can you portray a rape from a feminist point of view? can you talk about male sexual drive vs female sexual drive and so on ...

Spike starts from a pretty anti-feminist point. He clearly has his issues with women, he's abusive to Harmony and he says some pretty misogynistic stuff. His evolution is really interesting from a feminist POV, because it answer a question, in a way: can a man become a feminist, even if he started from a completely different prospective? Can we educate sexual offenders and such?

The problem is that BtVS drops the ball at times and anyway Joss likes to reset stuff after he's done. (Aka: Spike in AtS) But I would argue that Buffy's love doesn't become "the prize" for the hero because everything still happens inside her POV.

If we only saw Spike going through stuff and then being rewarded I would agree, but we actually see Buffy dealing with her issues at the same time and how she slowly realizes that she cares about this man. Ultimately she chooses to tell him that she loves him and she naturally starts to trust him and take comfort in him, which is all about her agency and her desire and that makes the romance good for me.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I just can't wrap my mind around that "fuck it, your mom was a slayer and she never loved you" speech. Aaarrgh.

this is an example of how Spike still lacks empathy, something I think he doesn't begin to develop until AtS5 from what little I know of it. But I think most of fandom takes Spike at his word and I'm not sure how the show writers intended that.

Spike's comments about Slayers basically echo that of a killer or rapist: She asked for it. And Spike is comparing Slayers to himself is s false comparison. Most vampires steer well clear of Slayers, Spike actively seeks them out to destroy them for the fun, the challenge, the glory. He chose to go after them. The Slayers are just doing their job, none of them sought him out. They're defending themselves in a war they were drafted into.

Can you portray a rape from a feminist point of view?

Yes, but not when so much of the narrative around it focuses on the feelings of the perpetrator rather than the victim. (And I may be one of the few Spuffy shippers who is exhausted by the emphasis on his feelings to the exclusions of hers.) And not when so much of the narrative is focused on how sex is bad and female sexuality in particular dangerous, dark, unstable and suspect; when virgin/whole stereotypes are everywhere; and in most instances the female hero is punished for her sexuality and her choices. BtVS displays a very victorian mindset on the subject. In short, Joss and the writers haven't done the work necessary to make their portrayal of sexuality and rape culture truly "feminist".

This gif set sums up my feelings:
http://buffysboobs.tumblr.com/post/97106293632/and-i-dont-give-a-shit-if-ive-made-you-a-better

Spike starts from a pretty anti-feminist point. He clearly has his issues with women, he's abusive to Harmony and he says some pretty misogynistic stuff. His evolution is really interesting from a feminist POV, because it answer a question, in a way: can a man become a feminist, even if he started from a completely different prospective?

Agree on that; he definitely does change over time and I appreciate that.

but we actually see Buffy dealing with her issues at the same time and how she slowly realizes that she cares about this man.

We really don't. The show - and now the comics - prioritize Spike's POV on the subject of their relationship from S6 onward. Buffy's feeling are left vague, unstated; he gets to do most of the talking. It's not at all equal. He opens up to Buffy, to Angel, to Xander and Dowling (in the comics); and a lot of discussion is him saying "You used me", "I got my soul for you", "it's all about you" and her mostly taking on the guilt without much argument. In the tv series, the clearest most moment we get about her feelings is in Beneath You, her PTSD response to brushing against his hand and "I wouldn't call it skittish, you tried to rape me". That's the one time on the show she gets to express her anger clearly and unequivocally. And opening up to Holden in CWDP. But how did she cope during that summer? How does she cope after he returns? What are her feelings? Why isn't she allowed to feel angry after that one scene in BY? Why is it all her fault? He may not have had a soul, but he had a measure of free will and agency.

He gets to drape himself on the cross in BY while she watches silently; gets to have the big shiny hero's death at the end. He gets the big dramatic moments and big speeches so there is NO DOUBT whatsoever that he feels very very very bad about what he did to Buffy; (his thousands of other unnamed victims are an afterthought.)

And yet she's the protagonist, her feelings should be the ones that are prioritized.

The net result is that both canon and fandom are primarily about the guys.

I think a really good point of comparison is the movie Heathers, which I only saw this past year thanks to Elisi; it contains the "bad boy" trope and then, without giving away too much, it totally subverted my expectations re: how the heroine responds and the issue of whether or not the bad boy is automatically forgiven.

[kikimay]

this is an example of how Spike still lacks empathy, something I think he doesn't begin to develop until AtS5 from what little I know of it. But I think most of fandom takes Spike at his word and I'm not sure how the show writers intended that.

I don't know. The thing that draws me to Spike it's mostly his ability to understand emotions. Not his own, mind you, but with other people he's pretty damn good. That speaks a lot about his ability to emphatize with fellow humans. But he could have said that awful things just because he was pissed at Robin and he wanted to hurt him BAD. Spike is also great at choosing the right words to hurt someone.

Spike's comments about Slayers basically echo that of a killer or rapist: She asked for it. And Spike is comparing Slayers to himself is s false comparison. Most vampires steer well clear of Slayers, Spike actively seeks them out to destroy them for the fun, the challenge, the glory. He chose to go after them. The Slayers are just doing their job, none of them sought him out. They're defending themselves in a war they were drafted into.

TRUE. That's totally bullshit but, you know, I can buy it because he's a vamp and he was Evil and stuff. I just can't wrap my mind around the "she was out fighting me so she didn't truly love you" WTF??? As if a woman who also have other priorities can't love her children. WHAT!!!!

Yes, but not when so much of the narrative around it focuses on the feelings of the perpetrator rather than the victim.

Yes on everything! That's what I thought when I wrote about Joss dropping the ball. And it makes me so furious. He introduced the rape - NOT necessary - but never really dealt with the consequences of the act. I don't like that.

But about Spike's feelings being prioritized I have to disagree. I mean, it could seem that way and it's totally fair to think that, but I love the S7 Spuffy dynamic SO MUCH, mostly because Buffy gets to be the stoic one and Spike the emotional one.

I think that Buffy's feelings evolution is shown but in such a subtle way that makes the narrative very interesting to me. We saw her little gestures of affection (Protecting Spike, choosing to believe him, looking at him with warm and trust) and while Spike just plain says: "I love her and she didn't love me back" and blah blah blah, Buffy's emotions are much more toned down because she's still trying to understand but I can feel them. I can. Mostly due to SMG's acting. Like, when she looks at him you feel this growing love process.

And that's me getting all sappy over Spuffy again. But mostly yeah, I think that Buffy's romantic feelings are also there. Thing is: Joss never cares about the consequences of the rape on her.

[rahirah]

David Fury is on record that when he wrote his bits of LMPTM, he was trying to show that Spike was not a good person despite having a soul, so I think that his intention was that we interpret that scene as Spike being indifferent to the fate of his past victims. Which doesn't make a lot of sense; if Spike felt no guilt or empathy, then what exactly was the First using to make him crazy?

The only way I can make sense of it in a Watsonian context is to assume that OK, Spike has been wallowing in guilt for many episodes now. Had Robin approached him in a different way, possibly he would have expressed guilt or regret. Instead, right after Giles has stirred up some of the worst memories he's got regarding his mother, Robin and Giles collude to trap him and kill him in a particularly horrible way (reverting him to a mindless monster and burning him to death with crosses.) So Spike's feeling threatened, trapped, and emotionally raw, and strikes back at Robin with the most vicious thing he can come up with. Additionally, I suspect that all the stuff about Nikki not loving Robin is Spike projecting his own situation with Buffy onto Robin.

None of this is particularly admirable on Spike's part, but I'm not sure it's a sign he's not capable of empathy or remorse in general.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Do you happen to know where the exact David Fury quote is? I can't find it by googling. I'd heard about it before, but I thought he'd said something about Spike still being an "asshole" despite having a soul, which has an entirely different set of implications.

Absolutely agree that Spike doesn't lack empathy or remorse. Even soulless Spike was capable of some degree of empathy and remorse.

[rahirah]

Unfortunately, no. I'm 90% sure it was in a magazine interview, but damned if I can remember which one. I recall it causing some confusion when it came out, because he gave it shortly after the episode aired, but by the time it got published, he'd changed his mind about Spike and was Spike's biggest fan on the AtS writing team.

eta: It's possible he did say asshole, I just remember it as having more of a moral implication than that. I mean, I'd totally agree that Spike was an asshole...

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't think I've ever read the actual quote, directly, but I'm pretty sure someone said the word was "asshole". Whether they mis-remembered or you did is something I do not know.

I know it's easy for these quotes to get confused. Some years ago, I went hunting on the internet for Marti Noxon's infamous "bad boyfriend" quote about Spike. I noted down my findings. I could find a lot of people complaining that she'd said that, but I couldn't find the quote itself. Instead, I found quotes like this:

"He sort of represents Buffy's other side. He's her id. He's hang dog because he loves Buffy, and he's not been getting his way. But in some ways I think he's the most powerful. And he's constantly struggling with his nature, which is also a part of Buffy's character arc. So, to me, he is heroic in the Buffy universe."

"Over the past couple of seasons, Buffy's romantic interest has been Spike, this bad guy who may or may not be bad anymore. The attraction is complicated. And it seems like a lot of things have gone into confusing, grey areas."

"People kept saying, ‘You know, Spike's a really great guy, he's so great.’ I'm like, ‘I know, he's come a long way. But in his heart of hearts, he still doesn't quite know the difference between right and wrong.'"

...which, whether you agree with those statements or not, doesn't to me sound like oversimplifying Buffy and Spike's relationship into bad boyfriend and innocent victim.

Actually, the only time I could find anyone at ME using the phrase "bad boyfriend" was in reference to Angel in S2. I believe I've even heard the season referred to as the "bad boyfriend" season.

ETA: By the way, if you or anyone else wants sources for those quotes I have them, but they may be outdated and no longer on the internet.

[rahirah]

And unfortunately, a lot of the original articles disappeared from the net within a year or two. I don't specifically remember Noxon saying "bad boyfriend," but I do remember one where she said something to the effect that it was impossible to imagine Buffy and Spike spending an evening watching TV together, and another where she said something similar to she herself had "dated vampires, but married an accountant" in regards to who Buffy should end up with. As I remember it, Noxon started off the season making fairly positive comments about Buffy and Spike, and then, as the season went on and the audience kept liking Spike too much, started making less and less positive ones, culminating in the "We proved our point" interview after Seeing Red.

But it was almost fifteen years ago, so I wouldn't swear to anything in a court of law.

[kikimay]

LOL David Fury forgot something called "logic". The cases are two: either Spike feels guilty about all his previous victims and that's why he's under the influence of the First OR he doesn't give a damn about them - only Buffy, apparently, UUUUGH - but then his angst post-Grave doesn't make any sense. Pick one, writers!

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

The thing that draws me to Spike it's mostly his ability to understand emotions. Not his own, mind you, but with other people he's pretty damn good.

Being able to identify or describe what other people are feeling isn't by itself empathy, hon. Giles knows exactly what Buffy's relationship with Spike is in S7 "you rely on each other" - but he displays no empathy with either of them.

Monsters can understand emotions. It allows them to take advantage, to manipulate - think of dictators for example, who become charismatic people because they know what people respond to and how to use that. Spike studies people in part because he was a poet before being turned, but afterwards he's also a predator. He studies people to take advantage of their weaknesses as prey. (He also makes a lot of shit up, to be honest. He totally misrepresents and exaggerates his knowledge many times. And he gets it wrong a lot of times. He's most accurate when it comes to people he doesn't care about - Willow, Tara, Xander. He gets the women in his life very very wrong many times, or thinks he understands them better than he does, and misjudges Anne, Harmony, Buffy and Drusilla.)

"Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another being (a human or non-human animal) is experiencing from within the other being's frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another's position." it's that second part - the ability to place oneself in another's position - that Spike largely lacks without the soul. It allows the demon to kill and enjoy doing so, and not feel a bit of guilt. Or do things like chain up someone you claim to "love" and demand that they return your feelings. Etc.

He definitely learned to develop empathy but it wasn't something that came automatically.

"she was out fighting me so she didn't truly love you" WTF??? As if a woman who also have other priorities can't love her children. WHAT!!!!

YES and this is a good example of Spike misjudging people or assuming he knows more than he actually does. He doesn't really "know" Nikkie Wood, or Xin-Rong for that matter. I think maybe barb is partly right, he's actually trying to hurt Robin in that scene, but I also think that maybe he believes what he's saying. IDK. I can see that scene as part of the whole arc of Spike learning to develop true empathy (and not just for those he's in love with, like Buffy, but for other people as well.)

But it's very problematic because it's still the Slayer of Slayers supposed being the "mouthpiece" for the feelings of the slayer he killed and who cannot speak for herself - and to the son of that same slayer no less. (Also a white man beating a black man bloody like that is disturbing if you know anything about the history of race relations in the US in a way that the writers didn't intend or seem to realize.)

He introduced the rape - NOT necessary - but never really dealt with the consequences of the act. I don't like that.

I don't think it's out of character for Spike - you won't convince me otherwise, you know - vampire here. It's not beyond the pale; we just forget that he's a vampire. Buffy forgot it too. It's the way it was handled - or rather not handled - that makes it awful. It could have been done right. But you do not introduce something like that as a plot point for the "growth" of the perpetrator.

But about Spike's feelings being prioritized I have to disagree.

Then we'll agree to disagree. He gets to talk a lot about his feelings, she says very little - and she is THE protagonist. We have no idea what she felt, how she coped, but we hear about his feeling a great deal. And I love S7 Spuffy - I can see a lot in Sarah's face, but I'm having to interpret a lot to fill in the blanks. Because the writers messed up and didn't know how to come back from that. That's a glaring issue for me. I can get sappy about Spuffy and still be bothered by that, the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Joss never cares about the consequences of the rape on her.

THIS THIS THIS. (Anyone who cared about that couldn't write the spacefrak either. And here is a very very good example of Joss' "lack of empathy" I think.)

[kikimay]

"Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another being (a human or non-human animal) is experiencing from within the other being's frame of reference, i.e., the capacity to place oneself in another's position." it's that second part - the ability to place oneself in another's position - that Spike largely lacks without the soul.

Yeah, I agree that he has a lot of work to do to reach that level of empathy that allows one to truly *feel* what the other is feeling, if that's even possible.

I also think, though, that he clearly starts from a feelings-centric point of view, from an empathetic one. Like, he has that inside himself. Of course he needs to develop this aspect and of course he's selfish, abusive and misguided when he's soulless (That's why I feel that the soul is necessary for Spike. There's no true love for him without that) But while Angelus, for example, understands *rationally* the bonds between human beings but doesn't seem to feel them himself, Spike *feels* those emotions and that ultimately allows him to grow past his monster self.

I think that Spike's truest saving grace is ultimately his heart and the fact that he's a sentimental prick, but better than feeling nothing, you know?

Of course, he's also bullshitting people, especially when he's directly involved into stuff. But that's SO human! I mean, we all are great to find solutions for other people and to understand other people's dynamics and express judgement. But what about ourselves? That's the tricky part.

He definitely learned to develop empathy but it wasn't something that came automatically.

I think that he has a base personality that focus so much on emotions and social relations - and that's good for the empathy thing - but he clearly needs to develop these abilities and be selfless.

YES and this is a good example of Spike misjudging people or assuming he knows more than he actually does. He doesn't really "know" Nikkie Wood, or Xin-Rong for that matter. I think maybe barb is partly right, he's actually trying to hurt Robin in that scene, but I also think that maybe he believes what he's saying. IDK.

And that's the main problem with Spike (And the authors!)

I read some stuff Jane Espenson said and, basically, Spike's development wasn't organic or really planned. It was much more like every author expressed his view of Spike but without a common planning. That's why the character shifts so much inside his own narrative. Espenson saw him as a *good guy at heart* while other authors maybe saw him more as a monster trying really hard. So, you know, WHAT? And that's from an Doylist POV.

I don't know if I believe that he believes that? I mean, I feel like he does, because he's Victorian at heart and maybe he has this deep belief that women should devote themselves to children and family. But he also clearly falls for stronger women all the times and when Buffy feels guilty for being a "bad sister" to Dawn he seems very mature and says that it's not her fault. (Like in "Blood Ties". FAVEEE!)

I don't think it's out of character for Spike - you won't convince me otherwise, you know - vampire here.

Oh no, I agree on that! That's very IC for Spike. He IS a monster. And I think it wasn't the first time (Just like Angelus or Darla or Dru. Do you really believe that in 100+ years of total depravity they didn't rape anyone? PLEASE!) I don't think it was necessary for Buffy. Why did she have to endure even the attempted rape?

About Spike's feelings prioritezed. Basically: yes on the attempted rape stuff, yeah yeah yeah. But no on the romance stuff. I feel like Buffy's emotional journey into loving this guy was fully explored but in a more subtle way.

Thing is: they never dealt with the post-AR trauma from her POV. And just one tiny flashback doesn't change a thing for me.

THIS THIS THIS. (Anyone who cared about that couldn't write the spacefrak either. And here is a very very good example of Joss' "lack of empathy" I think.)

THIS. Basically.

Again, a very harsh sexual aggression with little consequences for the victim. That's NASTY SHIT.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Really good point about Spike misjudging people. I once saw someone claim that Spike was a "Cassandra"--but if anything, he's a reverse Cassandra. Off the top of my head, Riley believes him in Into the Woods about Buffy, even though I for one believe that Buffy loved him (Riley, that is--although Spike, too, eventually). Buffy was at least halfway to believing him in Fool For Love, even though we know that both Nikki Wood and the Chinese slayer had connections to the world, and though Buffy does sacrifice herself at the end of the season, it's not the kind of death wish that Spike described. I wouldn't say that Spike is never right, or that people always believe him, but he's not the voice of truth that some fans think he is.

[rahirah]

I think that part of the reason that Buffy's feelings aren't explored (and it's a really shitty reason) is that the writers have actively avoided confirming or denying Buffy's feelings for any guy who isn't Angel. For purely cynical reasons of wanting to string along various shipper factions, they dance around Buffy saying what she actually feels, except in circumstances where the narrative (or another character) can provide plausible deniability to the contrary. So the only time Buffy says she loves Riley is when she's talking to Angel, and may only be saying it to piss him off, and so forth. Even now in the comics, Buffy says things like "I like who I am around Spike" rather than saying she likes Spike.

I think this is a horrendous mistake on the writers' parts, and has resulted in a lot more problems than it's solved.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Do you have a quote from one of the writers for that, or is this just speculation?

Speculation is fine, I'm just curious.

[rahirah]

It's just speculation on my part. I just can't help but notice that with every post-Angel relationship Buffy has gotten into, the writers turn cartwheels and do backflips to avoid Buffy directly telling the guys she's involved with how she feels about him, except in situations where you could spin it that she's fibbing somehow -- and those are damned rare.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Oh, I think Spike has empathy. He wanted Buffy to kill him in Never Leave Me because he was so horrified by who he'd done.

In terms of what he thought about Nikki, I'm going to tell you what I think was going on in his head. So I'm not trying to excuse or agree with him. Just explain. Robin Wood had just tried to kill Spike, activating the trigger than brought traumatic memories, and he last out at Robin. Nikki being a slayer gave him an out--vampires kill slayers and slayers killer vampires. Equal, right? Of couse, any consideration given to how vampires work on the show makes that equivalence ridiculous. But I think that's how Spike was thinking in a heated moment.

I don't read Buffy comics, and am not going to comment on them. I don't entirely disagree with what your saying about Spike's story being prioritized--I do think that there are times when Spike's arc was overprioritized by the show, and I've always felt that there were aspects of the attempted rape that were more about Spike's story than Buffy's.

But I think you're overstating it. Spike's a grand gestures guy--of course he's gonna drape himself on the cross. He gets to do more of the talking because he's talky. Buffy doesn't express her feelings as well. Shes more likely to express herself through action. There's a very strong gender-swappy element to this: the male character expresses himself all over the place while the female character is stoic. Better yet (for me), the badass century plus-year-old vampire emotes all over the place while the cute, twenty-something ex-cheeleader is stoic.

For a variety of reasons, I'm not comfortable with the idea that get because one character is verbally expressive and kind of a drama king that his PoV is automatically being prioritized over a character who is more direct and reserved.

You raise a lot of interesting issues: so here are my thoughts on a few.

1. Coping. This is always complicated in a story like this. On the one hand, bad crap happens to Buffy all the time. Giving too much weight to an attempted rape gives rape too much power. On the hand, rape is definitely something that should be taken seriously. I do think we see Buffy coping--her entire reaction to Spike throughout Beneath You, her avoidance of him after finding out about the soul until, what, Sleeper? The way she reacts when he comes up behind her in him. It's quiet, yeah. Buffy's not like Spike. And I don't want her to be.

2. Anger. This...is actually not a bad point. Something I will have to think about a lot more. In terms of anger, I would definitely count her confrontation with Warren in Seeing Red, but I would acknowledge that this is ambiguous, and not directed at Spike directly. Since I'm not sure how yet how to evaluate this from either a Watsonian or Doylist perspective, I offer no thoughts on feminist implications.

3. Blame for S6. I find the arguments about this so fascinating and so exhausting. People's interpretations of how Buffy and Spike deal with the aftermath of S6 are all over the place. I'm personally happy with how they both handled it. Which does seem to go against what I said in my post above about Spike continuing his pattern of telling her how to feel with "No, you don't". (Also realized after I posted that Buffy, also, has a pattern of telling Spike how to feel--or more accurately,that he doesn't. Not sure if that's relevant.) You know what, actually, I'm going to think about this some

But one thing: I disagree with you that Buffy thinks it's all her fault, or that we're supposed to think that. While I have issues with grandious apologies, and the reaction of many fans to grandious apologies, they are still acknowledgements of wrongdoing. There is plenty of talk throughout S7 of the things Spike has done to Buffy and those close to Buffy. Spike does often prioritize what he's done to Buffy over the worse things he's done to other people (an afterthought, as you said). And this does bother me. A lot. But the bad things he has done to other people are never forgotten.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I should have been more precise in my wording; I'm not saying he has no (zero percent) empathy whatsoever, but it's not a fully formed thing, either. Spike with a soul - his ability to truly empathize - is very much a work in progress; and I'm not convinced he has a great deal of empathy. I know he feels a great deal of guilt for his crimes.

I think Damages on AtS explores that much further as you and Barb have already discussed. But as a matter of fact in the shooting script for Chosen there is a description of Slayers being hurt or killed in battle and Spike feeling pain when it happens. A rather clumsy metaphor perhaps, but the amulet was actually meant to link him to the slayers empathetically - to the girls he once killed. Whether the series does it well or not, part of his arc, his journey, is developing empathy. He couldn't have had his revelation about Dana earlier than that.

But I think you're overstating it.

And I don't so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I know Spike is a grand gestures guy - but he's also a fictional character. The writers gave him all the grand gestures. Buffy can't hope to compete with "getting a soul". I agree with Barb's comments - it was done for cynical reasons. And that's deeply problematic. That's on Joss and the writers.

I actually was mostly in agreement with your OP, but based on your second reply I'm not sure we're in agreement at all on anything.You seem to be contradicting yourself from one to another.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Could you elaborate on how you think I'm contradicting myself?

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Were you referring to when I said I was contradicting myself? Sorry about the confusing. The way you phrased it made me think you expressing a new idea rather than repeating back to me something I'd said.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

Sorry about the confusing.

Sorry for the delay but I'm staying off the computer as my sweetie and I are spending our holiday weekend together; all will be explained in the coming week when I am back online.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Have an excellent holiday weekend!

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

Thanks! It's almost over and nobody has killed anybody (yet *lol*).

[kikimay]

Spike's a grand gestures guy--of course he's gonna drape himself on the cross. He gets to do more of the talking because he's talky. Buffy doesn't express her feelings as well. Shes more likely to express herself through action. There's a very strong gender-swappy element to this: the male character expresses himself all over the place while the female character is stoic. Better yet (for me), the badass century plus-year-old vampire emotes all over the place while the cute, twenty-something ex-cheeleader is stoic.

This, this, this! I was trying to say also this and I love it! I really love the fact that the man is the emotional one and the female the stoic one. FAVEEEE!

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Any story--at least any good story--is going to be open to interpretation. We all bring our own baggage to the table.
I do think that some stories are more sexist than others, but there's always going to be ambiguity. It's frustrating when someone comes up with a feminist interpretation of a story that ignores or justifies away the non-feminist aspects of the story, or an anti-feminist interpretation of a story that ignores or justifies away the feminist aspects of the story. It seems to turn into, "This story is more feminist than that story", when there's no hard proof and it's just a matter of interpretation.

I absolutely believe that you can portray a rape from a feminist point of view. I'm just not convinced that Seeing Red is it. Notice that I didn't make the argument that I think is most common among fans who think Buffy/Spike is anti-feminist: That it's terrible to show a woman having a relationship with her attempted rapist. I didn't include that partly because it's been said so many times, and partly because this was already a pretty long post, and I didn't want to have to untangle all those issues.

I have intensely mixed feelings about Spike's attempt to rape Buffy, and how it was handled.

Spike in BtVS S7 still has a lot of issues with women (see: attitude towards Nikki Wood as a mother and his own mother as a mother), but he is in a very different place than he was in BtVS S5. Curious: In what way do you think Spike was reset in AtS S5?

As I hope I've made very clear, I'm totally down with Buffy/Spike, and I do think it's a well-done relationship with lots of interesting stuff and some very feminist stuff. You're absolutely true that the inclusion and believability of Buffy's point of view makes the story much more feminist than...a lot of other stories.

But I can't get a way from the inevitability of the story. Spike loves her to the point of becoming good for her--of course he's gonna get her love. That's what happens to male characters like this in stories like this. The irony, of course, is that when he finally gets it he doubts it and then dies.

Maybe I'm wrong. Are there stories where a man reforms himself for a woman and goes on a huge quest for her and she a. develops no feelings for him, and b. is not criticized for the narrative for failing to develop feelings?

Spike initially believes that Buffy owes him feelings because he does things for her. Buffy eventually develops feelings for him. Interpretations of later season Buffy are difficult given her difficulty in expressing emotion, but I think it's reasonable to argue that a big factor in her love for him is that he did something huge for her (got a soul). Out of cultural context it's just another story. But we have a cultural context. Male privilege encourages men feel entitled to a women's feelings and bodies. "Nice guys" think that if they just do x, y, z, a woman will love them, and if she doesn't, she's the one at fault. Buffy/Spike is far from the worst offender, but it still plays into that particular idea. The idea that "no" will turn into "yes" if you keep bugging the woman and performing grand gestures for her is not feminist at all.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

The idea that "no" will turn into "yes" if you keep bugging the woman and performing grand gestures for her is not feminist at all.

True. Mind you, it's very closely related to the "knight performing feats for his lady" trope (it's not quite the same thing, because in medieval literature, the lady with rare exceptions isn't supposed to "reward" the knight by requiting his love non-platonically), which has been around a few centuries and will be a few centuries more. (I'm not completely immune to it myself, see my falling completely for Dench!M and Craig!Bond, who are a perfect example of this trope translated into modern terms.)

Anyway, back to your actual subject - excellent post, btw. -; thoughts to some issues:

1.) Us not seeing any victims (and relations of) of Spike other than Robin and Nikki Wood: and Holden, but since that was a killing performed while Spike was Under The Influence, it doesn't count the same way. It's one of the reasons why I wrote my "Five in One" story re: Spike's victims, to give faces to those stories. It's also why I love the AtS season 5 episode that culminates with Spike and Angel having their chat about being monsters, and Spike's conclusion that even if he wasn't the one who tortured Dana, there were others he did exactly these things to.... but I'm also torn as to whether or not it would have been an even better episode if they actually HAD let Spike be the one who tortured Dana, without taking it back. Since David Fury was a co-writer, I wonder whether in the first draft there was no reveal of another vampire, and it had to be changed because of Spike's popularity?

2.) Feminist aspects of Angel's and Xander's arcs: deserves a post of its own, but I'll say this here: Xander's arc actually does the "Nice Guy expects to be loved eventually if he does enough" arc right, because let's not forget, Xander starts out believing just this about himself and Buffy. And in many ways, the first season (arguably the only one written without the expectation of Buffy/Angel as something long term) sets him up in a way that in 1980s high school movies would make him the obvious endgame for the heroine. (And given that s1 is still related, tone wise, to the movie in a way later season's aren't, with Xander as the Pike analogue, that might very well have been the narrative intention.) But it's not what actually happens in the show. To me the point where Xander even subconsciously lets go of any expectation that Buffy will eventually fall in love with him is Restless, the playground in his dream and the moment where Dream!Buffy calls him her brother. Now I'm not saying Xander always handled not being Buffy's romantic choice gracefully (though his attitude re: Angel is certainly not just about this, because Angelus), that he couldn't be petty on occasion, or that he let go of the idea he knew what was romantically good for her (though I think it's telling fandom wants to have his guts for his pro-Riley speech in "Into the Woods" yet ignores Buffy casually dissed Cordelia in s2 when telling Xander "I just think you could do better" - meaning Willow at that point. Friends do occassionally offer overbearing romantic advice to each other). But in general, he was a good friend to her, accepting the relationship she actually wanted to have with him, on her terms, and didn't let this stop him from coming through for her in terms of heroic deeds. (The one time he refuses to do something in late s7 and turns against her, he has the considerable excuse of having just lost an eye.) So Xander's story vis a vis Buffy definitely makes him an example of someone who starts out believing the "she'll love me if I try hard enough and persist" trope applies to him, finds out this isn't the case and actually accepts it, without the narrative then performing a U-Turn by making him endgame after all.

(Footnote: I've heard via fannish osmosis that Xander and Buffy eventually have a thing in the comics, or at least a one night stand, but seriously, I don't care about the comics. Tv canon only.)

[rahirah]

They don't. Xander and Dawn fall for each other, and the minute Buffy hears about this, she decides that she does love Xander, after all, and runs to try and get him to dump Dawn for her. Xander shuts her down hard and fast. It's strongly suggested that Buffy doesn't really want Xander at all, she's just feeling lonely and insecure and... weirdly jealous of her sister, I dunno. It's part of the Twilight arc, which generally has Buffy acting like an alien from the planet Whatthefuckareyousmoking, and I try to remember as little of it as possible.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

...AKA why I don't read the comics.

Okay, when I was a teenager, I could never look at my friends' younger siblings in any way as a potential romantic interests. Now that I am an adult, I still can't look at those same younger siblings in any way as a potential romantic interests. Even if they're only three years younger than me. Xander remembers meeting Dawn when he was about sixteen and she was about eleven. Dawn having a crush on Xander at age fourteen was cute. Xander returning it bothers me.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

I forgot about Holden! But yes, under the influence.

The part that really annoys me about not meeting Spike's victims is S4-S6. Because I really don't think Spike felt any remorse for hurting anyone outside of Buffy's circle pre-soul. So what would the Scoobies have done if someone had shown up and said, hey, that guy killed my sister. Not addressing the situation pre-soul feels sort of like a cop-out. But then, Spike is far from the only character on the show to have some degree of copping-out with regards to his darkness.

Damage is an awesome episode. But yeah, it seems a bit cowardly to have it actually have been some OTHER vampire. That gives us more distance.

I've been thinking about Xander's arc on Buffy, and it does strike me that while he has a "nice guy" attitude in the early seasons, it's not really supported by the narrative. What does seem to be more supported by the narrative is the "boys will be boys" attitude that a lot of the characters seem to have, at least at that point on the show. Gabriellabelle in one of her posts talks about how Xaner in Never Kill a Boy on the First Date tries to look at Buffy through a mirror when she's changing, even though she told him to look away. It's never addressed. Unless hyena!Xander was supposed to address this in some way? Maybe I should rewatch the high school seasons before I make this analysis.

I really like Buffy and Xander's relationship in the later seasons. Xander and Willow friendship is my favorite, but Xander and Buffy are cool.

Buffy is a show that I felt ended at exactly the right time, and in the right way, so I have no interest in Buffy comics. Also, I have this sort of vague interpretation of Buffy in S7 giving up her specialness and solo hero status by empowering the potentials, and therefore from a meta point of view giving up her role as the protaganist. So while I wouldn't have minded seeing her, say, guest starring on AtS (She definitely needed more closure with Spike), I lost interest in anything that involved her being a main character. So, no comics for me.

[rahirah]

The most glaring issue to me is that the writers chose to make the near-rape of the heroine of the series all about her attacker's character development, which is... pretty damn skeezy at best.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Yeah--I didn't get into the attempted rape too much because so much has been said about it, but yeah, that was not the high point of feminism on Buffy.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I think that part of the reason that Buffy's feelings aren't explored (and it's a really shitty reason) is that the writers have actively avoided confirming or denying Buffy's feelings for any guy who isn't Angel. For purely cynical reasons of wanting to string along various shipper factions, they dance around Buffy saying what she actually feels,

Just popping to say, 150% agreement to all of this.

I think this is a horrendous mistake on the writers' parts, and has resulted in a lot more problems than it's solved.

And then the writers act shocked when shippers voice irritation and outrage because they feel as if they've been strung along. As if pissing people off is going to make anyone go away.

I think it's also led to a problem, long term, that I see even in the latest issue of the comics (#22); all the talk of characters "growing up" and trying to decide what they want to do with their lives, etc, and I have no idea what the protagonist herself wants to do with her life, what she wants for herself besides being with her friends and Dawn, and being with Spike. She's defined almost entirely by her relationships, which is how women are supposed to define themselves traditionally.

And that's kind of a big deal because she is the protagonist but she's still the biggest blank in some ways. (Especially without SMG to supplement the words of the script with tone and expression to help "fill in the blanks".)

The most glaring issue to me is that the writers chose to make the near-rape of the heroine of the series all about her attacker's character development, which is... pretty damn skeezy at best.

YES - that's the bottom line here. Very well-said.

(And merry Christmas - or whatever you celebrate - btw!)