Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Harris

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

!?!?!?? Did you even watch the same show?

Let's name just the two most blatantly obvious:

Buffy S2 - The Dark Age: Eyghon jumps into Angel, and we get to see Eyghon and Angelus, the two demons battle each other, jerking Angel and his body about as they clash. Angel is just along for the right, there is not a moment that Angel himself fights Eyghon. The demon is completely separate from Angel.

Angel S4 - Orpheus: Faith is in Angel's mind scape, where we see Angel and Angelus battle each other. And before we see Angelus remembering things completely different than Angel does: he is horrified at Angel saving a puppy.

No, it does not suggest that at all. Or if it indeed suggests that, we must by definition say that a person having a soul suggests the soul pre-exists a person being born as well. This too has had zero on screen evidence.

Zero on screen evidence of a vampire demon existing before it was sired is no evidence that the vampire demon doesn't exist first off, but since there's no evidence similarly for the soul, it is doubly no evidence that the vampire demon doesn't exist.

Whoever said anything that the new personality was derived from somewhere else? It indeed is NOT derived from anywhere but the previous human personality.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN THE DEMON IS THE HUMAN!

The demon is born inside the corpse of the human and takes what is there to mold itself a personality; twisting everything good into evil, and making anything evil worse (if it can). The result is a demon that is a pure evil caricature of the person that inhabited the corpse before that person died.

It however does not mean, AGAIN, that the demon is the human. They are two completely different beings, with completely different personalities.

Nope.

Liam --> dead, corpse.

Angelus animates corpse, molds itself a personality from Liam's as it is born.

Angel = Liam, the soul once more in the driving seat, with Angelus trapped beneath him.

Then there is no such thing as a conscience. Besides, you interpret that line completely wrong. That inner sense exists solely based upon the morality you adhere to.

Wrong. Your conscience is what makes you feel guilty when you did something wrong. Your conscience arbiters right from long, based only on your learned morality. Someone who has always been taught that slavery is good, will never not once feel guilty for owning slaves. Someone who is taught that chopping the hand off of a thief is good, will never not once feel guilty for doing so. Someone who was taught that lying is good and the truth is bad, will feel guilty when speaking the truth.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

And...? Liam was not taught that he should torture and kill people. He was taught that Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not commit adultery, etc. and that killing people and causing them pain is a sin.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

But Angelus is not Liam. What Liam is taught doesn't matter.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

So, you're using Circular Reasoning? Angelus can't be the same guy as Liam and Angel, because a soul is not conscience, because conscience would only make Angelus worse since he wasn't taught to be good, because Angelus is not the same guy as Liam?

OK, then tell me - where exactly did Angelus 'learn' that killing and torture is a good thing? He sure didn't need to learn it from Darla, since he decided to go and kill his family on his own, minutes after he sprang from the grave. Where did Angelus come from, and where did he learn all that stuff? Is there some sort of school for demons before they are sent to 'possess' the corpses of dead humans who have been sired? Do they have tutors?

And from your previous post:

Well then obviously Giles and Ripper are two completely different people. They don't even have the same mannerisms, they don't walk the same, they don't talk the same. Giles must have been overtaken by a demon when he reverted to his teenage self.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

I think to quote Darla what you are in life influences what you are as a vampire, freed from the restrictions of a soul and with the demon in charge. Liam wasn't a bad guy, just a lonely drunken teenage buck as was Ripper. Liam and William just had the bad luck to run into the wrong girl in the alley one night

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

No, but keep putting words in my mouth, while dropping entire arguments I made, while accusing me of doing things I didn't do. I'm certain some people will fall for it.

No, but then, keep pulling things out of your ass of things I've supposedly said, completely ignoring things I've repeated several times over. I'm certain you'll manage convince some people.

But here, let me repeat for the umpteenth time: a vampire demon is born inside the corpse, taking it over, molding itself a personality from the remains of the corpse - including the brain - twisting everything good into evil, and making anything evil worse, if it can.

That is a logical fallacy on your part that is massive on a scale it isn't even funny... I don't think I've ever seen a straw man this blatant since, well, since never. And why would you one do something so blatantly false and obvious?
Oh, yeah, that's why. I'm certain you'll convince some people.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

OT, but vampire Ripper would totally mop the floor with both Angelus & Spike!

I haven't seen "The Dark Age" in a while. I'll have to rewatch it.

As for "Orpheus," I would attribute this to Angel/Angelus' multiple personality disorder combined with a bad drug trip. After all, if this were a literal depiction of Angel/Angelus' mindscape, then why is Angel even there? At that point, Angel's soul was still M.I.A. I would better compare this to that old cartoon cliche of the little angel over one shoulder & a little devil over the other. Angel & Angelus have equal contempt for their opposing attributes but this doesn't mean that they're not two sides of the same Liam coin.

How can their personalities be "completely different" if you just admitted that a vampire's personality is solely derrived from its old human personality?

Furthermore, if a vampire's personality is solely derrived from its old human personality, then what is the source of this element that seems to have its own moral agenda of making the vampire as evil as possible? What you're describing kind of sounds like an anti-conscience, which is an intriguing notion. The only reason why I'm not willing to buy it is because, whenever they talk about souls & vampires, it's always about removing or restoring the human soul. They never talk about a demon soul as something that would be desirable to be removed or even could be removed. (The demon casino owner in "Double or Nothing" thought that Angel was trying to con him by offering his soul as a wager. "Nice try, but you're a vampire. I can smell it from here.")

(However, if I did buy the theory of a demon soul, and thus an anti-conscience, it might explain a couple things. In particular, perhaps the reason why Angel had a multiple personality disorder with Angelus while Spike didn't seem so afflicted is because Spike's soul was restored by an African cave demon that knew what he was doing. He knew enough to remove the demon soul at the same time. Meanwhile, since Angel got his soul back through a gypsy curse that doesn't even make much sense, he's stuck with an anti-conscience simultaneous with his regular human soul.)

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

While I would agree that learned morality has a strong influence on moral behavior, I believe that there must be something innate in all of us that makes independent moral judgments. If there were not, then there would be no human concepts of good & evil. A society comprised entirely of beings without independent moral judgment would be incapable of creating any moral values at all.

If nothing else, I think all (sane) human beings are hardwired with the ability to judge that it is wrong to cause undue suffering to other people. Learned morality then accounts for the varying interpretations of that universal moral truth. Certain cultures approve slavery or genocide because they believe that the ones they're enslaving or killing aren't really people. Other cultures will mutiliate criminals because they believe that they deserve it.

BTW, I busted out my Season 2 DVD collection today. I watched "The Dark Age," and I gotta admit that you do have a point there.

However, I also watched "Surprise"/"Innocence" and I came across something surprising that I had forgotten. Remember that bespectacled henchman that was working for Spike & Drusilla? The Judge was able to burn him! He wasn't able to burn Angelus when he tried but he was able to burn another unsouled vampire. (He also threatened to burn Spike & Drusilla but they only convinced him not to because they were the ones that reassembled him.) How could all unsouled vampires be pure evil if the Judge was able to burn one but not another?

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Except that Angel didn't arrive until Willow was already doing the spell to put him back in. She hadn't completely succeeded yet, with Jasmine-Cordy blocking her, but some of it could have already been present.

Being derived from automatically means different. If it weren't different, it wouldn't be derived from, it would simply be the same thing, not derived at all.

As for how, I've said this what, a hundred times now? It takes everything good, and twists it into evil, thus forming an evil caricature of the person that lived ones.

Naming a few blatant ones:

Angel loved his sister, killed her with glee.

Gunn's sister loved her brother, wanted to kill him with glee.

And you have multiple such events; good - evil.

The demon. You know, the thing animates the corpse and takes over. DEMON.

A demon is not a soul. The removal of the demon-spirit would be a rather bad thing; as in 'poof' - dust. The demon is what animates and holds the corpse together. Remove it, and it falls apart, dust to dust. A stake works just fine, it would be a wast of effort and a massive risk to try to magically remove demon-spirits.

No, that isn't a multiple personality disorder, those are two entirely different beings.

:sighs: No.

1. If Spike had lost his demon, he wouldn't be a vampire anymore, in fact he'd go 'poof'.

2. Spike is no different after his soul, the exact same way he was no different after turning. Remember that whole thing about "twisting everything good into evil". Well, what happens if there is nothing good to twist? The worse the person before being turned, the less difference there is with the vampire afterward.

3. Removing the demon with gypsy curse, is what would make no sense. And again, it's not an anti-conscience - it's a completely different being, a demon animating a corpse. This is Angelus. They wanted to torture the thing that hurt them so, unleash their furious vengeance upon it, and make it suffer. Removing Angelus would be counter-productive. "We want to make Angelus pay! So we'll get rid of him first so he doesn't suffer at all." They might as well have dusted him. No, Angelus had to pay, so they brought Liam back. At first, it didn't quite make sense to me either. What does it do to have Liam/Angel feel guilty, if Angelus is still there and doesn't give a shit and doesn't feel anything? That was of course until I saw Orpheus. Remember how Angelus screamed in horror just watching Angel save a puppy. Imagine how horrifying and torturous the actual event must have been like! Now add friends, feelings of guilt, loved ones - or eating rats out of guilt. Angelus is indeed very much still there, conscious, and lives through everything that Angel lives through. To Angelus, every single waking moment is a year worth of psychological and physical torture. The gypsies wanted to make Angelus suffer, and boy did they ever make him suffer.

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever! It makes independent moral judgments, and thus it is NOT human, but only with it, can there be human concepts of good & evil, that come from something not human.

You can only have human concepts of good and evil and morality if there is nothing independent from us making those judgments. Otherwise, they would be NON-human concepts of good and evil.

And indeed, this fits with our history. If there was something in us making absolute judgments about good and evil, the differences of morals through the ages would either be non-existent, or tiny. Yet what is considered some of the greatest goods today, is considered pure evil back in the bronze age. This that are considered pure evil now, were considered right, and totally good back then.

Which shows you how completely wrong you are. Those aren't varying interpretations of a universal moral truth; those are completely different and opposing morals.

Morals simply formed because it was good for our genes. If we protect our brothers and sisters, our children and our tribe, even to the detriment of yourself, your genes (or a large number of them at least) will continue to survive onward. Those who did not have this sense of protecting or not harming others, would die sooner themselves (since they wouldn't be protected in turn) and be less desirable mates. Result; they were less likely to pass on their genes, caring for others with the same genes were much more likely to pass on our genes - caring about others became a very powerful trait in humans.

However, this is ALL human. There's nothing universal about it; and it is supposed to only work on those with the same genes. The rest you exploit and destroy. Any morals beyond "protect your genes, and destroy others' genes" is stuff we have developed as our brains grew ever larger and more complex.

In case you hadn't noticed, the Judge does not burn good, the Judge burns human. The vampire with the glasses for example, liked books. That was the human trait that got him burned. However, what has liking books got to do with good or evil? You can like books and still enjoy slaughtering whole villages. In fact, most knowledge you can get out of books, can be used for both good and evil. And yes, glasses guy, was using the knowledge from the books to do evil. So no, nothing good inside him.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

I'm not sure that Gunn's sister was going to kill him. She could have intended turn him.

In the case of Angelus, he was a rather classic family annihilator. Just because you love your family doesn't mean that you're not going to murder them all one night. It is not uncommon amongst humans. Susan Smith loved her children; that didn't stop her from drowning them.

There are two cases of soulless humans without animating demons in the Buffyverse. In Seasdon 5 Bufffy's roommate partiallly sucks out Buffy's soul. Buffy went paranoid and kill-happy as a result. In Angel we see a boy who was born without a soul. In his case he was a normal human child who just happened to be far more evil than the demon that tried to possess him.

The vampire's evil doesn't come from the demon. It comes from the human. Buffyverse humans are naturally evil, it is only the soul that provides moral balance.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Spike and Harmony are anomalies. In his case, he's very similar as either a souled or unsouled vampire. He also seems to feel love (perhaps in a more perverted form) whether he's Spike, or human Willie the poet. Even when he is still evil, but has the chip, he is capable of doing some selfless and noble things. Like withstanding Glory's torture, refusing to betray Dawn's secret.

Harmony, likewise, changes very little in personality when she goes from human to vampire in BTVS series 3.

Angel/Angelus are often portrayed as seperate entities, on the other hand. With a few subtle similarities. When we first meet Angel in the pilot of Buffy, he has some of that Liam/Angelus cockiness. And he does in 'Chosen' as well.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Uh, no. Didn't notice the mannerisms change? She no longer sweet sister, she's a brutal killing machine. Why would it possibly want to turn her brother in a brutal killing machine stronger than her again? The whole bullshit talk is a classic 'trick your loved ones into getting closer and brutally kill them'.

That's brilliantly funny and idiotic. Liam would never kill his family, for one thing he doesn't have the spine to do it. Besides which, a guy hedonistically getting drunk every night sleeping with the local girls is about as far removed from the type of people that one day kills his/her family as you can get. On top of that, the people who "kill their family" kill their spouses and children, NOT parents and siblings.

And no, unless Susan Smith was insane at the time of killing her children, she did not love her children.

No. The child was not born without a soul, if it was born without a soul it wouldn't be alive, it would have been still born. The child, the soul, was simply far more evil than the demon and he got trapped inside. The demon's statement of "what soul" shouldn't be taken as literally, "there's no soul", but as "what humanity/good". As the demon's complaints about there not being a greater purpose of evil shows, it's idea of evil and what a soul is supposed to be, is simply wrong. A soul doesn't equal good or "humanity", a soul is neutral and capable of both. A soul is capable of the greatest of goods, but also the greatest of evils; and the demon got a taste of it.

Buffy didn't become evil because the soul was being taken away, she was becoming irritable and paranoid because she didn't get to sleep and dream properly. The creature sucking her soul constantly interrupted her sleep cycle. This is a simple case of real life biology, and has nothing to do with good or evil.

This makes no sense, none whatsoever. The whole of W&Hs stick is to seduce humans into evil. If all it takes is making humans evil is the removal of the soul, why don't they just cast one world wide soul sucking spell, or several smaller ones across the globe at all their offices, and be done with it?

There's no point to "seducing a person into evil" if they are just plain evil to begin with, there's just something unnatural int them that keeps them from unleashing it.

Not only is it pointless, it's rather disgusting to boot. If everyone is evil, I have no interest in watching. I prefer watching people, more so good people, not watch a bunch of disgusting evil things walking around faking it.

Then there's Buffy being in a heaven. How did she get to heaven if her soul isn't her, and just an unnatural conscience? In fact there would be no point in heaven and hell to begin with! All people have one purely good thing, that regardless of their choices is proper good and should thus go to heaven, and another part that is purely evil, that regardless of their choices belongs in hell. You would have to tear a person asunder and send the good part to heaven and the bad part to hell, always; so if people as a whole don't go to either place, what's the point of "sending them there", when in fact, you don't.

Oh, please. He only did that for self-preservation. Glory looked at him less than a bug. The moment his usefulness alive was over to her, Spike knew he'd dust her instantly.

Actually, she got dumber. But yeah, like I said: the worse a person is, the more evil, the more self-absorbed, the less good there is for a vampire to twist into evil, the less differences there are between the person and the vampire afterward.

Which of course doesn't matter.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Human's soul give them the choice to choose beween good and evil. Having no soul removes that choice, you can't be good. Spike is not good but capable of love for Buffy and that's what makes him protect Dawn, it is real for him but he's not good, he is the 'serial killer in prison'.
Spike was sired by Dru and people sired by Dru seem to retain some humanity, possibly due to her link to the PTBs. Harmony doesn't have that although she does miss being human a little

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Interesting point; maybe it carries forward, too, as the vamp sired by Angel in Why We Fight seems to think that he has retained some aspect of soulfulness.
Actually, given that the Master claims to have a soul in season one of Buffy, maybe it's his lineage that matters. Maybe it's a line of vampires that#s more intelligent or aware on some level, given that most of its members appear to be @ss-kickers compared to other vamps.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

So Lorne isn't good? Neither is Clem? Whatever else demon that is on the side of good that we've seen?

There are plenty of soulless creatures that are capable of good. A soulless human wouldn't be evil by definition either. Remove a soul, and a human still has his brain, he has logic, he's capable of analyzing the world around them.

Vampires just aren't among those that are capable of such things.

Except that he didn't do it to protect Dawn, he did it to protect himself. He also doesn't love Buffy, he may lust after her and be obsessed with her, but he doesn't love her. Vampires aren't capable of love.

Drusilla doesn't have a link to the PTBs. Where do you get this stuff? Fanon?

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Gunn's sister was very obviously planning to turn him.

Now you do have a point, William was indeed profoundly evil - his poetry should be considered a crime against humanity!

Ah yes, because Harmony was the evilest of the humans turned into vampires, while Liam was such a good man, so selfless...

Oh wait, your stance is actually that Liam was never a good man, right? A bit of a problem in your logic, again...

I am so impressed with your amazing knowledge about the type of people who kill their families! Are you a criminal profiler by any chance?

O rly? Guess you haven't heard of Lizzie Borden, or the Menendez brothers, or a bunch of other people who have killed their mother or father or both their parents - you can read such news in crime section in papers all the time... It's just that parents who kill their children tend to get a lot more press coverage. And what doesn't get to the front pages didn't happen, right?

Finally one thing that you're right about!

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Well, it's pretty heavily implied in this universe that people with visions and prophecies (Buffy, Doyle, Cordelia, Lorne, etc) get them from the PTB. It would make sense that Drusilla's visions come from the PTB as well.

Angel: "I liked your poetry."
Spike: "You like Barry Manilow."

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

Why would the ones on the side of light, give visions to pure evil vampire on the side of darkness, to be used to slaughter people.

Seriously, that makes no sense whatsoever.

Oh, and no, Buffy does NOT get visions and prophecies from the PTB, she doesn't even know the PTB exist. It's the slayer spirit that hands her prophecies. The PTB exist solely on the Angel show, and only bother people in the Angel show. The Slayers have nothing to do with the PTB.

No, she was very obviously planning to kill him.

You did notice his creepy stalking of the girl he was reciting his bad poetry too, right? The exact same creepy obsession with that other woman in his life; his mother. The exact creepy obsession he would have for Drusilla, and then Buffy. There's nothing good there.

Liam was a spineless coward who couldn't deal with life and went to drink instead. There's nothing evil there. Harmony was cold self-absorbed bitch that happily destroyed the reputation of her supposedly friend, so she could be the queen of the school herself. Nothing good there.

Yep, keeping trying to put words in my mouth. I'll bet you succeed in convincing a few dimwits I actually wrote such things.

Nope. Lizzie Borden was insane, the Menendez brothers did for the inheritance; thus cold rational reasons. The type of people you're describing, "who will one day kill their families", are a whole different sort; they are filled with hatred and resentment toward just about anything in the world, and their families in particular. They are very different from insane people, and cold calculating murderers. Liam was never such a person.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

It makes plenty of sense. Drusilla was getting the visions long before she was a vampire. She just happened to keep them after she was changed.

I'm not saying the PTB gave them to her in the same way they gave her to Doyle or Cordy. But the visions, at least to me, prove some kind of connection to some greater power.

This is just being close-minded. Angel and Buffy exist in the same universe. The PTB exist in "Buffy" whether they're mentioned or not. All you have to do is a bit of reverse engineering from "Angel" to "Buffy" to figure it out.

How did Angel come back from Hell in Season 3 of "Buffy" if the PTB didn't do it? Who made it snow at the end of "Amends" to give Angel a sign that he should continue to live? It's not stated outright, but it seems pretty obvious that the PTB brought him back because he still had work to do for them.

 

Re: Douchebag characters considered "Nice Guys" - example 1: Xander Ha

If the PTB gave them to her, why can't they stop giving them to her, once she's been turned into a vampire?

Not to me, not even close. In fact, you do not have any evidence at all, let alone proof. Your "proof" is nothing but a hypothesis you didn't bother checking.

The fact that she has the visions before she got turned, and after, indicates it's something inherent in her being, something genetic; and thus completely human and nothing to do with any higher power giving her anything.

Except that if they bothered Buffy, we would have heard about it. We don't even hear or see anything about it, even when they bother Angel in the nearest large city.

Perhaps, but we don't actually know. In fact, it could just as easily have been the First Evil that brought him back, would make sense given Buffy's S7 that only has functioning internal logic if the FE won.

Even then, of course, Angel isn't a Slayer.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised the PTB deliberately keep the hell away from the Slayer for fear of pissing off the Watcher's council. All the crap they've got hidden, including evidently being the descendants of the seriously powerful fucks that kicked the demons off Earth and created the Slayer, I would not be surprised they have ways to hurt the PTB.