~~ morality-playerama.
Jan. 22nd, 2004 06:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaEr, right then. For some reason, I want to make yet -another- post on BtVS. This is getting out of hand. Sooo... I'm thinking of making a Buffy filter. That would be good. So um... if you want in, just comment or something. 'Cause it seems silly to make a poll just for this. Right then. If no one says anything, I guess I'll filter this to Erin alone from now on, eheheheh.
Reading `Still Life in Sunnydale', which is a Season 6 AU where Spike gets Warren to take his chip out & then kills him, post `Seeing Red'-- it hits me once again. I can't seem to see Warren as a Big Bad. As someone worthy of hatred and revenge.
It's easy to write off people who're impossible to empathize with-- clear-cut villains, people who're deeply stupid and violent, people who get off on torturing children, that sort of thing. It just bothers me that so many people like vampires (blood-sucking demons, etc) and seem to have this huge issue with Warren. I mean, maybe this means that Warren hits too close to home-- is less of a fantasy. But I just keep thinking that everyone's "slaying" and good/evil concepts are based in a type of fantasy-- Buffy's and the vampires' and Warren's. Buffy has this whole savior complex and Warren has this whole supervillain complex and the vampires have this whole "we're demons, aaaayyyyyy" thing going on. They're all insane, technically, outside of their own context.
There seems to be a difference in my mind between cold-blooded deviousness (there are many more examples of it in the Potterverse than in the Jossverse-- possibly because the former is more archetypical) and maddened, deranged scheming. Warren wants to take over the world, wants to be a super-villain. He's basically insane. Why don't more people realize this? He's no more sober than the vampires are. He's not really aware of what he's doing. I think Buffy & Angel & Willow have more capacity for true evil, because they -understand- what the price is, what the stakes are. They're not children, and still they fall. Look at Willow! Why does no one hate -her-? Oh, right, she wasn't in her right mind. Sort of. Grey area, right?
Now-- let's pretend the vampires are human-- they are just basically pumped up, possessed humans anyway. They'd be classified as insane-- psychotic, right? Willow got possessed too, by another sort of power. Everyone's possessed by something-- rage, if nothing else-- that makes them snap and go all psychotic. In the end though, they're still human. Vampires, I mean. Then again, I think that "monster" is a myth people tell themselves to dissociate themselves from behavior they find impossible to empathize with. That they don't -want- to empathize with. But to have a "monster", don't you need an opposite? Something they're -not-? And what person is anti-monstrous? Completely pure? And how is that "normal"? This, of course, gets into all the morass of one's notions of normality, also.
I was just disturbed by my own discomfort with the palpable anti-Warren vibe I keep encountering. It's like, are my own morals being wonky? Why am not anti-Warren?
I would almost say I'm anti-Spike-- the early Spike, when he wasn't self-conscious-- almost. He had nothing recognizable as "moral fiber" whatsoever, but I can't blame him, and I wouldn't call him monstrous. If he really didn't have a consciousness of self, an awareness of right & wrong-- then how could he be blamed? He's just a predator-- no different than a tiger, for all his intelligence. It is only after he becomes aware of the real consequences of his actions that you could say he's capable of being judged by human standards-- which, by the way, you would have to be applying to him in order to judge him at all, pre-chip. Thus, I simply withold judgement on pre-chip Spike. He bothers me-- I wish he'd hurry up and become self-aware-- but he also amuses me and attracts me like any slinky gorgeous predator would. Plus, you know, the amusement factor.
`Still Life in Sunnydale' is pretty interesting because it gives us a post-chip Spike who chooses to take it out & return to his old ways. Then makes a human-centric moral judgement and kills the people threatening Buffy, vigilante-style. And then you have Buffy's rather confused moral reaction. I myself would say that while the soul gave Spike guilt, it was the chip that forced him to confront himself less emotionally-- to make more sober choices. The chip gave him a taste of human moral judgements-- allowed him to act like a man enough so that he could almost pretend he was a man. And that belief-- that's at the center of it all. It's the awareness of self, that belief that he could (almost) be a man. It didn't matter if he -was-, as much as it mattered that he felt like he could be.
It bothers me that people get so much more riled up about Warren than the vampires, though it reminds me of how people felt about Umbridge. It's almost like there's more of an outrage towards petty evil because that's what most people understand better-- because they feel themselves in danger of becoming that or doing that, maybe? I'm not sure. For instance, a lot more people hate Draco Malfoy than Tom Riddle. Why? Draco is nothing-- he's a brat. Why is he worthy of hatred? It's like... people don't -hate- evil because they're -afraid- of it, and that's a different ballgame altogether, isn't it? Because hating petty, nearly harmless evil makes you feel more powerful-- you know you'd win. But with demons and insane villainous all-powerful wizards-- not so easy, is it?
Maybe I'm all defensive of Warren because I think he's actually a closer parallel to Draco than Spike is, believe it or not. I think fanon!Draco's more Spikeish, but canon!Draco is a lot like Warren, man. He's obsessive and clingy-pathetic and largely ineffectual and laughable and bitter. Warren's funnier, though. Still. This is petty, human, petulant and pointless. It's not cool to be like that-- it's pathetic. And doesn't it say something about people that they have this bloodlust towards the pathetic, weak "villains"? How petty and low is -that-?
I think people get too caught up in "cool" Spike, early-BtVS Spike, and forget that he was always pathetic and disenfranchised and downtrodden. That's why his journey is so awesome, why it has such meaning that in the end, he saves the world-- because this truly is a triumph of will, for him. He wasn't always so cool. There are parallels, I think, in his character arc and that of Faith and possibly Andrew.
They didn't all triumph in the same way or to the same extent, but they struggled with similar things, didn't they. I think they have a lot in common. They all had to face the most unlovely parts of themselves and get beyond that somehow. They all had to pay the price. Everyone does. If you stop at early Spike, then you don't allow him that gift, I think. The gift Buffy received at the end of Season 5-- just as she gave it, I think she did receive it. And it's not that that's the ultimate moment of glory-- becoming selfless, that is. That's why I'm glad BtVS didn't end there-- because there's life beyond that. You don't just stop-- you don't get to die and tie everything up with a nice bow-- you keep going, and it's messy and painful and pitiful and you lose ground, always reaching new heights if you keep trying. Always new heights to reach.
But yes. Warren. He didn't deserve to die.
Reading `Still Life in Sunnydale', which is a Season 6 AU where Spike gets Warren to take his chip out & then kills him, post `Seeing Red'-- it hits me once again. I can't seem to see Warren as a Big Bad. As someone worthy of hatred and revenge.
It's easy to write off people who're impossible to empathize with-- clear-cut villains, people who're deeply stupid and violent, people who get off on torturing children, that sort of thing. It just bothers me that so many people like vampires (blood-sucking demons, etc) and seem to have this huge issue with Warren. I mean, maybe this means that Warren hits too close to home-- is less of a fantasy. But I just keep thinking that everyone's "slaying" and good/evil concepts are based in a type of fantasy-- Buffy's and the vampires' and Warren's. Buffy has this whole savior complex and Warren has this whole supervillain complex and the vampires have this whole "we're demons, aaaayyyyyy" thing going on. They're all insane, technically, outside of their own context.
There seems to be a difference in my mind between cold-blooded deviousness (there are many more examples of it in the Potterverse than in the Jossverse-- possibly because the former is more archetypical) and maddened, deranged scheming. Warren wants to take over the world, wants to be a super-villain. He's basically insane. Why don't more people realize this? He's no more sober than the vampires are. He's not really aware of what he's doing. I think Buffy & Angel & Willow have more capacity for true evil, because they -understand- what the price is, what the stakes are. They're not children, and still they fall. Look at Willow! Why does no one hate -her-? Oh, right, she wasn't in her right mind. Sort of. Grey area, right?
Now-- let's pretend the vampires are human-- they are just basically pumped up, possessed humans anyway. They'd be classified as insane-- psychotic, right? Willow got possessed too, by another sort of power. Everyone's possessed by something-- rage, if nothing else-- that makes them snap and go all psychotic. In the end though, they're still human. Vampires, I mean. Then again, I think that "monster" is a myth people tell themselves to dissociate themselves from behavior they find impossible to empathize with. That they don't -want- to empathize with. But to have a "monster", don't you need an opposite? Something they're -not-? And what person is anti-monstrous? Completely pure? And how is that "normal"? This, of course, gets into all the morass of one's notions of normality, also.
I was just disturbed by my own discomfort with the palpable anti-Warren vibe I keep encountering. It's like, are my own morals being wonky? Why am not anti-Warren?
I would almost say I'm anti-Spike-- the early Spike, when he wasn't self-conscious-- almost. He had nothing recognizable as "moral fiber" whatsoever, but I can't blame him, and I wouldn't call him monstrous. If he really didn't have a consciousness of self, an awareness of right & wrong-- then how could he be blamed? He's just a predator-- no different than a tiger, for all his intelligence. It is only after he becomes aware of the real consequences of his actions that you could say he's capable of being judged by human standards-- which, by the way, you would have to be applying to him in order to judge him at all, pre-chip. Thus, I simply withold judgement on pre-chip Spike. He bothers me-- I wish he'd hurry up and become self-aware-- but he also amuses me and attracts me like any slinky gorgeous predator would. Plus, you know, the amusement factor.
`Still Life in Sunnydale' is pretty interesting because it gives us a post-chip Spike who chooses to take it out & return to his old ways. Then makes a human-centric moral judgement and kills the people threatening Buffy, vigilante-style. And then you have Buffy's rather confused moral reaction. I myself would say that while the soul gave Spike guilt, it was the chip that forced him to confront himself less emotionally-- to make more sober choices. The chip gave him a taste of human moral judgements-- allowed him to act like a man enough so that he could almost pretend he was a man. And that belief-- that's at the center of it all. It's the awareness of self, that belief that he could (almost) be a man. It didn't matter if he -was-, as much as it mattered that he felt like he could be.
It bothers me that people get so much more riled up about Warren than the vampires, though it reminds me of how people felt about Umbridge. It's almost like there's more of an outrage towards petty evil because that's what most people understand better-- because they feel themselves in danger of becoming that or doing that, maybe? I'm not sure. For instance, a lot more people hate Draco Malfoy than Tom Riddle. Why? Draco is nothing-- he's a brat. Why is he worthy of hatred? It's like... people don't -hate- evil because they're -afraid- of it, and that's a different ballgame altogether, isn't it? Because hating petty, nearly harmless evil makes you feel more powerful-- you know you'd win. But with demons and insane villainous all-powerful wizards-- not so easy, is it?
Maybe I'm all defensive of Warren because I think he's actually a closer parallel to Draco than Spike is, believe it or not. I think fanon!Draco's more Spikeish, but canon!Draco is a lot like Warren, man. He's obsessive and clingy-pathetic and largely ineffectual and laughable and bitter. Warren's funnier, though. Still. This is petty, human, petulant and pointless. It's not cool to be like that-- it's pathetic. And doesn't it say something about people that they have this bloodlust towards the pathetic, weak "villains"? How petty and low is -that-?
I think people get too caught up in "cool" Spike, early-BtVS Spike, and forget that he was always pathetic and disenfranchised and downtrodden. That's why his journey is so awesome, why it has such meaning that in the end, he saves the world-- because this truly is a triumph of will, for him. He wasn't always so cool. There are parallels, I think, in his character arc and that of Faith and possibly Andrew.
They didn't all triumph in the same way or to the same extent, but they struggled with similar things, didn't they. I think they have a lot in common. They all had to face the most unlovely parts of themselves and get beyond that somehow. They all had to pay the price. Everyone does. If you stop at early Spike, then you don't allow him that gift, I think. The gift Buffy received at the end of Season 5-- just as she gave it, I think she did receive it. And it's not that that's the ultimate moment of glory-- becoming selfless, that is. That's why I'm glad BtVS didn't end there-- because there's life beyond that. You don't just stop-- you don't get to die and tie everything up with a nice bow-- you keep going, and it's messy and painful and pitiful and you lose ground, always reaching new heights if you keep trying. Always new heights to reach.
But yes. Warren. He didn't deserve to die.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-23 03:10 am (UTC)Damnit, must your posts always make me think? B-)
Oh crap, I just can't shut up.
Date: 2004-01-23 03:28 am (UTC)I shall stop spamming your LJ now. :))
Re: Oh crap, I just can't shut up. Part Deux
Date: 2004-01-23 03:31 am (UTC)Oh HELLO, Crabbe and Goyle!!!
Re: Oh crap, I just can't shut up.
Date: 2004-01-23 05:56 am (UTC)I honestly have no idea what my original point all this was.
*Trudges back to work*