Midnite musings on monster morality....

[Kahuna Burger]

So I have insomnia, and I'm thinking about the two buffy episodes I watched on FX today. They are the one where Riley leaves after being discovered at a weird consensual blood drinking vampire nest, and the one just after. And they are reminding me of this philosophical problem I have with the morality of the buffyverse. (yeah, yeah, its a TV show, how can you waste your energy on philosophical thoughts on it, I just said I have INSOMNIA, right? )

Basically, soul = being deserving of life and capable of good and fluffy bunnies everywhere. No soul = target, being without any rights to even exist. This was brought home in the first episode where buffy kills a vampire as she is running away. A vampire who as far as buffy knows exists purely by consensual feeding, and may have never killed anyone. A vampire who Buffy let run, then stabbed in the back to get revenge for drinking from Riley at his request! This has no consequences, even emotional. Contrast this with the next to last season where Willow kills a guy who murdered at least two people, including her love, tried to kill herself and buffy, consorted regularly with demons and dark powers, but he was HUMAN! *gag*

In the second episode Spike draws attention to the fact that he is not taking a taste of blood from the many open wounds at a disaster (and is in fact actually comforting a victim). Buffy basically says he's disgusting for expecting credit for it... But why not? The guy is building a conscience from the ground up and making a deliberate choice to do the right thing out of social pressure even when his chip wouldn't punish him for it. I was very disapointed at the plot twist to give him his soul back, rather than continue his evolution, which I found much more interesting...

Anyway, I guess this worldview/morality is actually pretty apealing to the stereotypical rpg mindset ("spitting baby goblins is a GOOD act" - "No, its morally NEUTRAL!") but I find it causes me to root for the demons.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Skade]

Anyway, I guess this worldview/morality is actually pretty apealing to the stereotypical rpg mindset ("spitting baby goblins is a GOOD act" - "No, its morally NEUTRAL!") but I find it causes me to root for the demons.

Kahuna Burger

Now you know why Spike was so popular. Buffy (the character more than the show) has some real morality issues. Maybe it is excusable becuase of the responisibilty she bears, in constantly having to chose life and death for the world at large, but really it's not. The inconsitencies you point out are very real, and can't be denied. Buffy killing that vampire girl was not a good act, not even neutral. It was an act of revenge and evil. What was worse was riley, who had no reaction to it. The reason being neither valued her as anything but a vampire. Riley had no feelings for her, no more than he would have for a vial of coke, and Buffy values very little in the world, much less some random vampire licking her man.

As to Willow, I think her disintergration was necessary to what she would become. The power had to corrupt her so that she would ascend to another level by the end of the series. As to why she was not killed... It was a possibilty, Buffy considered it at the beginning of the last season when she was suspected of some murders, but really since Willow was one of the few things Buffy did value, she was safe. Anya points out this when she calls Buffy on many of her moral laxitudes.

This is why I like Angel better.

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

In the second episode Spike draws attention to the fact that he is not taking a taste of blood from the many open wounds at a disaster (and is in fact actually comforting a victim). Buffy basically says he's disgusting for expecting credit for it... But why not? The guy is building a conscience from the ground up and making a deliberate choice to do the right thing out of social pressure even when his chip wouldn't punish him for it. I was very disapointed at the plot twist to give him his soul back, rather than continue his evolution, which I found much more interesting...

What Spike was doing was emphatically not "building a conscience". He was trying to score points with Buffy. Spike proved, time and again, that without a soul he could only hurt people. He was, at his core, incapable of loving Buffy or anyone other than himself. I know he said he loved her, but without a soul, this is just going through the motions. He didn't know how to truly love any more than a rabid dog does. He wanted to love Buffy though, and that's why he went and got a soul.

And as for Buffy dusting the vamp at the "consensual bloodletting" nest, hey, that's what Buffy does. Remember, vampires don't need human blood, any kind will do (Angel himself takes mildly chilled pig's blood, I believe). What those vampires were doing was taking advantage of human weakness and preying on some very disturbed individuals. Serves 'em right.

 

[WayneLigon]

Basically, soul = being deserving of life and capable of good and fluffy bunnies everywhere. No soul = target, being without any rights to even exist.

I have no problem with that. Everything I've seen in the Buffyverse says all vampires with the exception of two (that I know of; having just completed Season Four, and knowing at least that Spike has a soul) are evil; they're demons (Yes, I know from watching Angel that not all 'demons' are evil but the vast majority of them surely are). The person that was in there is gone, destroyed. What's left is a shell that's just waiting for it's next meal. It might talk nice and act nice, play and work well with others for a time, but it's a thing with less of an inherent reason to exist than a coffee table. And as soon as it thinks it can get away with it, out come the fangs.

Anyway, I guess this worldview/morality is actually pretty apealing to the stereotypical rpg mindset...

You work within the premise you're given; in all versions of D&D until this one, evil monsters defaulted to 'born evil'. It's made that way, born that way, will die that way, etc. That was the default wordview of the game, and the one the vast majority of gamers used.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

they're demons (Yes, I know from watching Angel that not all 'demons' are evil but the vast majority of them surely are). The person that was in there is gone, destroyed.

This is a part that hasn't made much sense to me... Spike remembers his life as william, right down to the emotional impact of things that happened when he was "human". There is not some possessing force inside of him, its william with a bad attitude and thirst for blood... So he gets his "soul" back, and he's suddenly a different person... except he's not. He came back to sunnydale, where "william" has never been, and interacts with the people who "Spike" knew, with the same basic relationships but more angst. (this is my capsule impression, I haven't seen a lot of the last season). I just don't see any evidence for the "person in there" being gone.

Also, saying that he was just "pretending to be better" or trying to get into buffy's pant or whatever, doesn't work during the time Buffy's dead. He has no idea she's ever coming back, but he's there protecting Dawn, trying to live up to the last promise he made to Buffy. And he's disgusted by the buffy bot and doesn't want an image of buffy lusting after him anymore.

I dunno, a lot of what I'm reading in defense of the no soul = thing outlook seems to be begging the question. You can't defend an assumption with the assumption. Show me where its demonstrated...

Kahuna Burger