Living with Plot Contrivances: or how I learned to (mostly) stop worrying and love Spike's story

[maggie2]

So sometimes the plot has to bend around other things the writers are after.   In a seven year run on TV like the one BtVS enjoyed that has to happen a few times.  Seth Green decides to leave suddenly, and the story bends around his departure.   Sometimes the bends work.  Other times they are, shall we say, less than obviously natural to the flow of the story.

There are two that come to mind with regard to Spike's story.   The first is the non-staking of Spike in season 4 and especially in early season 5.  The second is Spike's non-phone call to Buffy in season 5 in Angel.    It's obvious why they had to happen.  In season 4, they wanted Spike on the show and him getting dusted would have interfered with the plan.  On AtS, they wanted Spike to stick around in LA, and they presumably didn't want a Buffy story line to stomp all over the fifth season of Angel's show.   I think both work better than most people think, but I'm not sure I'm entirely satisfied with them.

1.  Spike's non-stakage.  I think this hits on important themes that are already being raised in the show in general and in season 4 in particular.   The presence of the Initiative calls into question whether demons are flat out unprotected by any moral rules at all.  There's storyline pressure, especially around Oz, to say that demonic beings are not without moral standing simply because of their demonic nature.   A simple "kill all demons" rule is inadequte.   That simple rule was also under pressure over on season 1 of AtS.   Once Spike is rendered harmless, the story's own development would make killing him difficult. 

I'd add that there's a meta question floating around about what demons are supposed to be metaphors for.  I've argued this before in my meta on Lie to Me.  If demons stand in for our various traumas, dark emotions and angst, then a story about a girl slaying them is really a story about a girl struggling with life's darkness.  But once demons become persons, the question is raised about what distinguishes a slayer from a killer.  In our actual world, there are no persons who are subject to any kind of "kill at will' rule based solely on what they are.  Even bad guys that the audience might want to see get offed (like, say, Warren) can't be *slain* in a way that's as morally unproblematic as Buffy's routine dispatchment of vampires.  Spike is simply too much of a person to be staked.  And the scoobies don't stake him precisely because they do know him.    They use the rule about not staking unthreatening demons to skate around the hard question of what it would mean to stake a person they knew should he become threatening.

And that, of course, comes up explicitly in OOMM.  By their stated rules, Spike should be stakable the minute he shows that he's actually trying to get around the chip and that he fully intends to do harm the minute he does.  Yet the scoobies still don't stake him.  Nor do they even seriously engage the question.   I'm sure some wank is possible on why this doesn't even come up as a question -- but I think it's a pity, because it's at this point that there's a tension between the rule about non-threatening demons and the ookiness of having to stake someone that they know personally (however dangerous he is).  That does come back up, most notably in Selfless.  But the Scoobies  presumably sidestep it here because the show is more concerned with other themes at that point.

2.   The second that comes up a lot is that the real Spike should have called Buffy at some point in season 5 of AtS, and it's just OOC that he didn't.  I find that all straight-forward to explain.  Spike took some time before calling Buffy.  First he's a ghost and then he's just trying to avoid running straight back to her for a variety of reasons I find compelling.  But he tells Andrew in Damage that he intends to contact Buffy, and then in TGIQ he makes a clear move to contact Buffy.    Moreover, he's told (or at least it's broadly implied) that Buffy knows he's back and has made no move herself to contact him, and has further moved on with someone else with the thought that maybe she'd catch up with Spike at some point down the road.    Andrew doesn't give Spike any reason to think that Buffy feels miffed that Spike didn't manage to call her before Andrew himself spilled the beans.

Now none of these are obvious choices for Spike.  One might expect him to have tried to call sooner.  One might even think he'd be a bit less quick to take Andrew's word for Buffy's non-interest in his resurrection and her unconcern that he hadn't called her yet.   I'm fully persuaded that Spike 100% believes that Buffy doesn't love him.  But they were close enough at the end that he should have at least found it odd that she was 100% blase about his return... not interested enough to contact him or express anger at his failure to contact her.  Still, in the main, it makes enough sense for me to be puzzled when many people think it's really OOC for Spike to not have called, and to be especially puzzled by the fact that it's rarely acknowledged that Spike *did* try to contact her.

I wonder if my relative difficulty with the first plot contrivance and my relative lack of difficulty with the latter isn't pretty tied up with the themes I engage with.  I'm very interested in the line between demons and persons and the distinction between a slayer and a killer.  I find it one of the most fascinating aspects of the verse.  Spike's non-stakage sits on that issue, and it bothers me that the story bends around it most especially at OOMM.  By contrast, I'm a post-Spuffy fan who is post-Spuffy precisely because I don't think Buffy loved Spike, or at least was never going to love him in a way that was reciprocal.   I loved Spuffy in season 7, but precisely because Spike had stopped chasing after Buffy.  And so while I think the details are a bit goofy, I'm perfectly content with a season 5 AtS story line wherein Spike has stopped chasing after Buffy.

It's interesting to ponder what we make of the places where the story bends.  And especially what to do with it when the story bends in a way that does violence to the show.  My meta will always feel like there's a hole around OOMM.  Presumably for some there's a hole in season 5 of AtS.  There are other bends -- Angel's complete lack of assistance in season 5 despite his stated reason for giving up his humanity in IWRY comes to mind.  I like to treat the show as a well-written organic whole.  But there are a lot of places where it just isn't.  It's a TV show subject to lots of different demands and it just doesn't always add up.  Let's just say it makes the whole meta-game challenging!

Comments

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Since when is trusting Andrew adequate to relay a message? To me, it's not. And especially not when relaying messages as important as "I'm back from the dead"--that's another reason why I thought he told Andrew to lie. One, Spike wasn't ready for Buffy to know. Two, Spike wanted to tell her himself. Because him telling her himself does honor to the deep connection they shared and to the way he discovered she was alive again--he saw it with his own eyes and it's one of the most powerful scenes ever. I sometimes rewind that scene to see the wonderful changes in his expression as he watches her climb down the stairs.

If anything, the fact that he's able to just let it go and let Andrew be the go-between speaks two things to me. One, he's still "terrified" of what it means to be loved by Buffy, something that he's never truly experienced because he's never been "close" to anyone before. Two, he doesn't care about Buffy anymore, he doesn't need to see her with his own eyes and hear her voice and know that she's happy and moved on. The fact that he trusts Andrew to tell him Buffy is happy with the Immortal when the last time they saw Andrew, Andrew was busy lying his ass off and pulling a fast one on them...? Yeah, not smart. You can't take what Andrew does at face value, which means Spike had to have his own reasons for buying a line that smacks of BS.

Buffy is the woman he loved who took his hand while his soul was burning up and felt the fire with him. Who was there for his most glorious moment. That connection doesn't fade away. That intimacy. And frankly, it's too sacred for Spike to be letting Andrew in on it. Buffy and Spike don't talk about their relationship--it's too private for them. Spike doesn't even really let on about how deeply connected he and Buffy came to Angel--he just lets Angel think it was all about sex "If you do it enough times" and never lets on to how Buffy depended on him. So I think it's more that Spike's insecurities let him believe Andrew's line; insecurities that Angel has been amping up all season. I think by then Spike doesn't believe Buffy ever loved him, not the way she loved Angel completely; all from being forced to view the world through Angel's (and AtS') viewpoint. Which is why him actually being back in Buffy's presence is essential to me. Because only when in her presence will there be truth to their connection--whether it's over or not. Angel's dismissal and Andrew's storytelling aren't adequate for a man of Spike's typical tenacity. Hence why I think he's "terrified" of what it means to be loved by Buffy.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Spike didn't expect Andrew to tell Buffy. He had to assume that Andrew *had* told based on what he was presented with in Rome. As for not taking Andrew's word at face value it's not just Spike who did. Angel did too. And frankly so did most of fandom until it got retconned in LWH. When Angel tried to NOT take Andrew's word for things in Damage he got presented with an army of slayers as proof. So I don't think canon supports the idea that Spike *should* have assumed Andrew was lying just because Andrew is Andrew.

I do agree that it's hard to see Spike readily buying the content of what Andrew says without at least being puzzled by it. But I put that down to the broad comedy. They're focusing on the romantic rivalry -- and Spike *would* be quick to believe that Buffy wasn't romantically interested in him. But the writers didn't take the time in a broad comedy to explore the nuance that while Spike expected romantic rejection, he should have been surprised that Andrew is portraying a Buffy who doesn't care that her dear friend is back.

But I'm not going to buy that Spike is in the wrong on any of this. Buffy left him with the one-two punch of their closeness not having to mean anything and a basking radiant smile for Angel that she never got even close to giving Spike. He's got feelings for her and I don't blame him for wanting a life of his own before reopening what could only be a friendship between them. Eowyn makes this point well in her comment. And now as far as he's concerned Buffy has implicitly thanked him for not trying to push her on the I love you that she didn't really mean by not reaching out to contact him either. That's Spike's POV, and I think he's entitled to it.

We'll be finding out soon where Buffy really is on all of this. If she really did love him, it's a tragedy that Andrew put up an information gap between them. I'd love that, cause it's the best we're going to get. But I'm pessimistic.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Here's where I'm at. I believe Buffy is hurting. I believe Andrew created an information gap. And I believe that Spike let his insecurities win him. He's not a bad guy. He's just insecure.

And I won't blame Buffy because she has no agency. Spike does; he got to make a choice. Sadly, his choice was based on insecurities and this results in Buffy remaining. Yes, it's tragic. But of the two, only Spike had the power to do anything about it and he didn't. So I can't help but think 'if only Spike hadn't succumbed to his insecurities', but it's also a part of their dance. That as Buffy grows in her confidence in Spike, Spike loses confidence in himself and his connection to her. I don't blame Spike for being "terrified", but I don't admire him for giving in to it when it leaves Buffy in a place of heartache. She has no way to do anything about it because she doesn't know. He does have agency and yet the tragedy stands. So while I mostly blame fate and miscommunication and Andrew, there's a small part of that that says results come from cause and Spike's insecurities are a part of that.

And if he gets credit in my mind for being heroic, for risking pain, all in the hopes of saving others from hurt; well then I do give him demerits for giving into his fears, for living "terrified" all leading to others remaining in pain.

His insecurities lead him to believing Andrew. And that's really the problem. The fact that he believes anything from Andrew without questioning it or wondering 'hey, Andrew could be lying like he was last time...'

Spike made some bad decisions. It's less blameworthy than the outright manipulations of Andrew, absolutely. But I don't think it was a wise or a courageous decision, but one based on fear. And decisions based on fear aren't admirable to me. Which is to say if there is an admirable option, that is the one preferable to the one you do when cringing away. What makes Spike so admirable a character to me is that he was one who "risk[ed] the pain". Him losing that quality only makes me pity him. And his becoming a character I pity (as less than what he was) is so beyond what I want for him that I can't help but view it as a bad decision. Spike giving into his fears isn't a good time for him imo.

Breaking it down. Buffy has no agency in the situation. Spike does. Spike gives into his fears because he's "terrified" of what Buffy's love could mean. He's afraid to "risk the pain" now. He's giving into his fear. Giving into fear to me is always a bad decision, but he makes the choice to let his fear rule his actions. So yes, I do find him partially responsible for the situation. Because he has agency and is a player in the charade. He is culpable.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Romance and friendship often produces a pile of hurting all around, but I don't think in terms of culpability. Buffy and Spike danced a very long dance together that left Spike with the strong impression that she'd want him to move on when she was ready for him to not be there any more. Spike is acting on that. To assign culpability is to say that Spike had some obligation to try to maintain the relationship and I don't see that he did, any more than I think Buffy had any obligation in season 7 to signal to him that she didn't want him to move on when the battle was over. She gave what she could. Spike's now giving what he can. Between the two of them they've never managed to give enough to actually get them together. That happens sometimes, and it's nobody's fault if there's just not a huge magnet working to make things come together.

Also, I don't think I'd want to call Spike's main motive fear. I think he honestly thinks she'd want to move on, and it would be perfectly reasonable to interpret Andrew's portrait of the situation as consistent with a Buffy who is relieved that Spike's not tracking her down and making her retract the ILY. He could honestly think he's doing exactly what Buffy wants him to do.

My last word is just a reminder that Spike thinks Buffy has had some post-Chosen agency in the question of whether they should communicate. He's wrong about that. But it's important to remember when thinking about his POV. He's not just deciding for her in TGIQ. He thinks she's decided something on her own.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

I think the point where we divide is over Andrew. And it's what Gabs noted above. Andrew is an unreliable narrator. Spike trusting Andrew for any stated motivations, let alone vague implications is unwise. So yes, that's something I find faulty reasoning for. It was a bad decision. And Season 8 has shown it was the wrong decision. .

Because as the situation stands, Buffy does not know. Spike thinks she does. The only reason he thinks this is because of Andrew. Trusting Andrew has been shown to be unwise many, many times. So Spike made a bad decision largely based on the fact that he was worried about it being awkward (as you and Eowyn note) and that he in the past is "terrified" of the intimacy he felt with Buffy (End of Days).

I'd feel differently if it were Willow telling Spike that Buffy had moved on or Dawn as the writers had originally intended but couldn't get Michelle because she was unavailable. Then I'd of course be saying, yes he tried but she already knew and Dawn told him she'd moved on and was happy. And Spike trusts Dawn and wants Buffy to be happy, so he let it go. What's more, if it had been Dawn in the scene, then the retcon wouldn't have been so easy to swallow.

Basically, Spike got played two times by Andrew--in Damage and in TGIQ. Fool Spike once (in Damage), shame on Andrew. Fool Spike twice (in TGIQ), shame on Spike.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

Still not fair, I don't think. The point of Damage was to confirm that Andrew *did* speak for the slayer organization. He had an army to back him up. We know Andrew's an unreliable narrator. But Spike has every reason to think he really does represent Buffy. It went down in Damage as though she did. We might all hope that Buffy has made a mistake in entrusting Andrew with a position of authority in the organization. But Spike is NOT wrong in thinking Andrew has that position, or in thinking that Buffy trusts him enough to have given him that position. Buffy's judgment may well be mistaken, but tagging Andrew as a watcher, which she did do, means that she's had a role in putting Andrew into a position where Spike would take him as a credible source about Buffy.

[angearia.livejournal.com]

Buffy's love life is not the Slayer organization. And Andrew exaggerating on matters of the heart is essential to his character because Andrew doesn't get romantic love in a realistic sense. Would you go to Andrew for advice on your relationship? Would you trust him to accurately judge your relatioship status? No, I wouldn't. Because he doesn't get it.

Also note in Damage how Andrew says nobody in his camp trusts Angel (and Spike by association) anymore. Nothing has changed since then, so there's no reason for Andrew to trust Angel and Spike with the truth either and no reason for Spike and Angel to believe he would trust them with the truth. Andrew established in Damage that the trust between the two sides is gone--there is nothing to re-establish this trust in TGIQ. This is why Angel was spying on Buffy (aka the Decoy) and why the men he sent were summarily attacked and put out of business.

Andrew is an authority (thought not the best) on the Slayer organization. But it's been established multiple times that Andrew doesn't trust Angel and by association Spike with the truth about the Slayer organization.

There is no current trust. There is loads and loads of deceit that Spike decides to ignore and in doing so, he makes a wrong decision. He's believing a lie when there is a lot of evidence that it's a lie. The evidence that it's a lie is what makes it so easy for the retcon to fly.

[2maggie2.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't trust Andrew to have a position of authority in the slayer organization, either.

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I think it's special pleading to want to say that it's fine for Buffy to trust Andrew but not fine for Spike to trust Andrew. We've been shown he's an unreliable narrator both in romantic issues and in slayer business (see #23). But I can see that you are fierce in your opinion that Spike is at fault! Maybe we should have a duel or something to defend the honor of our respective beloved characters! Pistols or swords?

[nmcil12.livejournal.com]

Plus you have to add that in the mos significant, IMO, character episode about Spike and Angel/Angelus, "Destiny" - he won that struggle, both physically and symbolic. He makes the choice, and Angel/Angelus even tells Spike that Europe will still be there after they have taken care of their immediate emergency.

But I have to say that one of the things that I always wanted for this character is to be able to live as a hero/champion/man without his awesome love for Buffy - and his expression of that status was given in a whisper in Angel. One of the most significant developments of his entire journey and it is acknowledged almost by no one - and possibly by no other character. It's been a while since I have watched Angel Season 5 - but as I remember Spike is almost speaking to himself.

Can't wait to see where Joss Whedon is going to take his characters for the ending of the comic book season.

It's such a pity, IMVHO, that the Buffy-Angel kissing scene was ever used in the finale - I don't see that it had anything to do with the current storyline of the series.
Especially the ending of that scene and Buffy's line about still thinking about them as a potential couple - it was like hooking her right back into her past instead of letting her move on as a strong and independent woman on her own life path. If it was time for Spike to move on, it was even more time for Buffy to move on as well.

[jamalov29.livejournal.com]

Jumping in to say how much I adored your last paragraph starting at :Buffy is the woman he loved who took his hand while his soul was burning up and felt the fire with him.

I so totally agree.