So, as most of you know, I'm currently writing a William fic. It has always intrigued me how much humanity Spike seemed to have retained even after he was vamped. His desire to "save" his mother, his devotion to Drusilla and, later, to Buffy and Dawn. The Judge said that Spike (and Dru) stank of humanity, or something to that effect, while "there is no humanity" in Angelus. To me, this has always indicated that Spike is essentially William without a conscience and with a demon--or, rather, a desire to feed on humans.

I'm curious to know what everyone else's interpretation is. Do you see Spike as (a)The same man, only without a conscience. (b)A demon with the same memories as the human being in whose body he now resides (c)Something else altogether.

Call me nuts, but this seems like a topic worth discussing. :)

i think as vampires go in the jossverse, spike is an anomaly....

joss's canon explanation of vampires is a demon re-animating the dead body of a human, while retaining all of their memories and such...

However, having just watched season 7, this is the thing that is fresh in my mind...If it wasn't the same person, just a demon retaining William's memories, then how could the first use those painful memories of his closeness with his mother, and her rejection after her turning, against him so fully? And taking that a bit further, why was Spike so traumatized and hurt by her comments and actions, if he wasn't the same person? I mean, the whole sire/childe sex thing seems to be fairly well accepted by most, so why would it have been such a big thing for him, as nothing more than a soulless demon reanimating a human corpse?

No, I think it's quite clear that something of william remained in spike, regardless of how this makes him different from other vampires. The way his path went, as an echo of william's situation with cecily, over and over, from one unappreciative woman to whom he gave his *everything* to another...it's just too similar...

I believe that if nothing else, Spike somehow retained a shred of his humanity...though in my fics I tend to come from an unwritten standpoint of the vampire spike being william without a soul, pretty much...without a soul, and with a century in which he's built a facade to hide behind...

Okay, Spike's mother is an excellent example of a demon just reanimating a corpse and retaining the memories.  Spike is something different altogether.  I'll put it like this: Spike is and always was William, soul or no, though William wasn't Spike.  The demon freed William from inhibitions that surpassed alcohol because it made him a different species, with different rules to the game.  He's no longer a gentleman, but a demon, so he went with it.  He was what society (be it demon or human world) expected him to be.  Though when pressed into either mold, he still didn't fit- to passionate and kind with his human peers, too wild and reckless and not sadistic enough for the demon ones.  Either way, he ended up following his blood.

William without a soul... I'll agree with that.  However, IMHO, Spike has always had a conscience, and love, and that's what sets him apart- those things never left him. He'll play the game, but he'll only go so far.  He'll eat and/or kill humans, cause hey, he's evil, and that's what he's supposed to eat for food.  Letting the world get sucked into Hell, well, that's a whole other ball of wax.  Just because you're evil doesn't mean you have to automatically be illogical.  But the majority of demons (or evil doers in general) would disagree with Spike on that because he's not going with the "if it's evil, then do it" motto. 

I always thought that Spike retained a bit of his soul since Dru wasn't all there when she sired him, I think she did something wrong. I think the demon just supressed his William, when he was chipped, it allowed his William to come forth a bit more.

See, Joss' simple explanation of a "demon reanimating a corpse and taking those memories" is far too simplistic for me to take. I've read too much about the biology of the brain, you see.:)  You are the sum of your memories and experiences. If the demon just "stole the memories", they wouldn't feel from them, wouldn't call them mine, etc., etc. It would be like it just downloaded a movie and watched it, remembered it....but the movie isn't "demon".

Frankly, I think every vampire was their person without a soul. The thing that made it hard for the humans, is that some people, when you strip away the constraints of humanity and morality are hiding black, horrid cores. All those "negative" feelings and emotions can now bubble freely because they don't care who it hurts. Obviously, every demon is also individual, and some were definitely more evil than others. But it's just an influence, really.

So, yes - Spike has always been William.

CM

I'm not sure that Joss or anybody over at ME got straight just how the vampire is related to the original human.  At least some of the writers have said that Spike is an anomaly.  And they even have Spike saying that his Mom wasn't his Mom after she was turned.   OTOH, I don't think there's a clean difference between Angel and Angelus.  Not only do they share deep character traits, it makes no sense for Angel to feel guilty for his deeds as Angelus and (mostly) he does feel that guilt.   Harmony pre- and post- vamping is hardly distinguishable.  So maybe their best story is that some of the original human comes through, but to varying degrees.  I do mostly think of Spike as "William without a soul/conscience" -- but the demon does seem to add in a taste for violence. 

This question hurts my head!

UB -- just want to say thanks for your fic.  I stumbled on it over on your old website and had feared that it was a lapsed WIP.  Glad you are back with it and I look forward to seeing it unfold.

Thanks so much, Maggie. I'm glad you like it. :)

CM, honestly, I cannot see how every vampire could be their original incarnation only without a soul, because I seriously doubt that William's mother actually harbored all that hatred against him. She treated him well in his life, expressed love for him, and never seemed to hold incestuous intentions (::shudder:: That scene disturbed me to no end!). This is why I'm inclined to believe that William/Spike are the same person, because he *did* have the same affection for his mother once he was turned.

As someone else stated, Spike was capable of feeling love and guilt. However, his guilt was obviously only for bad deeds done to people he already cared about. He couldn't care less for the deaths of strangers. This is why I say he most likely did not have a conscience when he didn't have a soul. Or at least, he did not have a conscience the way we would perceive it.

Um... can I say that I think it's a little bit of what everyone else said? lol

I think a vampire is essentially the same as the human they were - the same memories, to some extent the same personality - but losing their soul and gaining the demon (whatever that actually means...) frees them from some human constraints. 

To at least some extent, they lose their morals/conscience - which I see as a survival instinct. You can't survive if you can't get past the eating people thing. (Unless they're forced to go the pig's blood from the butcher route, of course.) Depending on the personality of the person, this loss of morals/conscience unleashes a level of darkness, sort of like CM was saying, that varies for each person. Generally, I'd say the more evil you are as a human determines how evil you are as a vampire (Liam/Angelus vs. William/Spike, for example), but there are cases where perhaps extreme piety and repression as a human paves the way for extreme evil as a vampire (I'd look at Drusilla and Spike's mother as examples of that). 

Basically, the exchanging of the human soul for the demon tends to amplify some characteristics (tendency for violence) while stifling others (sense of morality) but doesn't change the fundamental personality of the person.

I think that vampires in general are basically the same people without a soul and without a conscience, but with a demon.  I might have bought the explanation that the human leaves the building and the vampire demon sets up shop in the body at the beginning of the series, but definitely not after 13 total seasons of seeing William turn into Spike and Liam turn into Angelus turn into Angel turn into Angelus turn into Angel turn into Angelus turn into Angel :P 

Spike definitely displays the same characteristics of William (even with what little we see of him in the cannon).  Both love completely, if a bit foolishly.  Both are very sensitive, though Spike's learned to hide his hurt over the years.  Both devote themselves completely to one woman: William to his mother, Spike to Drusilla and then to Buffy.  I think that DoS had an excellent point when she said that the First wouldn't have been able to use Anne's rejection and attempted seduction of Spike against him if he were not essentially the same person.  Spike definitely has a conscience, but it does seem to only come out when he's harmed someone that he cares about (i.e., Drusilla, Buffy, Dawn) I think that Spike makes a valiant effort not to be William, but he doesn't succeed.  The Judge sees his humanity, Joyce and Dawn respond to his humanity.  Even Buffy acknowledges his humanity when she calls him William in "As You Were."

Liam was a drunken, whoring lout with a soul.  Angelus was a sadistic bastard without a soul.  Angel is not drunken, whoring, or sadistic, but he does show traits of Angelus even when he's soul hasn't taken a leave of absence.  He used Darla to try and loose his soul, he let Drusilla and Darla kill the room full of lawyers, he was vengeful of Wesley, and let's not forget his hair-brained plan to take on the Senior Partners.  He can be manipulative and self-serving when it suits him.  Angel does still have the darkness of Liam and Angelus in him, but perhaps his curse of a soul and a conscience tempers the extremity to which he goes.

As for the other vampires: Harmony is COMPLETELY indistinguishable as a vapid teenager or a vapid vamp.  Drusilla is crazier than a loon either way, and Darla didn't exactly walk the moral high ground as a human.  Anne spent her life with a son who tried to crawl back up into her womb, and when Spike vamped her, she tried to give him a push :P

I think that the vampires are the humans, and perhaps the lack of a soul removes the constraints of human inhibitions, magnifying otherwise suppressed tendencies.

UB - the part I think comes directly from Anne was her statement "No, I used to hate to be cruel...". I see the messing with his mind (the creepy incest talk) as the demon filling in with the evil. As a human, I'm sure Anne was frustrated that Williwm didn't try harder for independence, and once soulless and demonized, she said the foulest thing she could to force him away. I think, possibly, she wasn't a very strong woman, so her humanity left completely when she was turned. She was Angelus.

Eowyn - you got what I was trying to get across. Thanks.

We can't discredit the demon that enters the body. The mind is still the same (minus the soul and conscience), but the influence of the demon seems to vary greatly upon who entered the body. The personality and the demon are basically symbiotic.

CM

I'd have to disagree guys- with Spike (I'm not going even get into other vamps), it wasn't a loss of morals or conscience- as a vampire, he was supposed to eat people (well, drink their blood), kill them, etc., and as William, he was... passive and proper and abided by the laws of society, and as Spike, he adjusted to the laws of the demon world.  It's all perspective- can we really say that Spike had a loss of his conscience just because he killed and drank blood?  Was he not doing what was in his nature?  He acclimated to the side of darkness, and that's why I believe it has no bearings on his conscience or his level of "evilness."  William was not evil, and Liam, though he was an alcoholic and enjoyed the company of hookers, didn't do what his father wanted of him, is also not evil.  Adapting to one's new environement does not constitute lack of consciousness.  I'm not applying this rule to all vamps- cause Angelus was just... creepy, what with the slaughtering of his family among many other things, but William just made necessary changes to survive.  Spike and William= different sides of the same coin, IMO.

Scarlet, I'm going to have to disagree with you (which I hate doing cause mostly we agree on stuff).  If Spike were just doing what was "in his nature" he wouldn't have experienced any guilt when he got his soul -- but he did.  It's wrong for vampires to kill humans because a) they don't have to (pig's blood works fine) and b) because they should recognize that humans are rational creatures (they can talk to them) and c) because they always talk about being evil -- which implies that they know it's 'wrong' and just don't care.  And Spike/William didn't just make the 'necessary' changes to survive.  In his very first episode (School Hard) he kills a guy just for the heck of it.  Also, your reading takes away from one of my favorite moments -- in Crush when unsouled Spike looks at Dru while she's feeding and sees her, finally, as the monster she really is.  It would have been so easy for him, at that point, to go off with Dru -- and I think the big reason he doesn't is because he loves Buffy exactly because she's NOT a monster -- at least not like Dru.

CM - I think you're right on about Anne being frustrated with William. I'm sure that, as a human, she loved her son very much, but even in the few scenes we see her in, she expresses disappointment that William hasn't found a girl yet - and while she probably appreciates that he wants to take care of her, she probably would've liked grandchildren before she died, too! And while she never would have said anything unsupportive of his poetry, I wouldn't doubt that deep down she was pretty damn sick of it. So when she was turned into a vampire, she does a complete 180 - much like the goody-two-shoes kid who suddenly hits college and is overwhelmed by the freedom and goes overboard drinking themselves silly every night. The demon liberates her and allows her to say things she *never* would have said - things which probably had some truth to them, but which were put in the most hateful terms because it was a demon influencing them.

Scarlet - I think Spike's (or any vampire's) drive to kill and drink blood *does* indicate a lack of conscience. It is his nature to kill - but we've seen that vampires, Spike himself in fact, can defy that nature. The lack of a conscience is what allows him to not feel guilty for killing people. And it's necessary, because if vampires felt guilty about killing people, how would they survive? What you seem to be arguing, though, is that we should view vampires as animals - their instinct is to hunt and kill, and we can't fault a cat for killing a mouse, so it should be the same as with a vampire. I think it's different, because I see vampires more as people than animals, and therefore should have the self-awareness to know not to follow all their instincts, just as humans suppress some instincts to be more civilized. But then again, I could just be thinking like that because I'm a human and don't think vampires should eat me - I bet cows (if they think) don't think humans should eat them, but we do, and don't see anything wrong with that.

One other thing I'm thinking about is the effect of the soul. Angel's an interesting case.  Liam was a drunken, whoring lout and, no, Scarlet, he wasn't evil, but he was definitely a bad seed. The demon only encouraged that, and all the sadistic tendencies that were suppressed came out. The soul makes things even more interesting. A lot of people look at the Angel of B1-2 and conclude that he's better than Liam was as a human, and how is that possible if it's the same soul? But what they don't consider is the 100 years he spent *before* he met Buffy. I think, just like Spike changed over time, Angel did too. When he first got the soul, he was still trying to be a vampire, still feeding off people, but only criminals because his conscience wouldn't let him hurt anyone else. I think Angel with a soul for the first 100 years was just like Liam, saddled with the guilt of a mass murdering serial killer. And because Liam was a weak man, Angel was crushed under the guilt and it broke him. So when the opportunity came to be good, to do something meaningful, he took it. Liam wouldn't have done that - but Angel had all that experience of suffering behind him that Liam didn't. But we also see that the soul doesn't completely suppress the demon instincts, because UB lists all the Angelusy things he does with a soul.

And I think the reason why Spike handles the soul so much better than Angel did (only a few weeks of crazy rather than decades of brooding) is because Spike has already changed - he's a stronger person than Angel was when he got his soul. The Liam part of Angel was crushed by the guilt. But the William part of Spike wasn't crushed, because Spike had come to terms with his Williamness. If Spike had been totally evil and cursed with a soul, I think we might have seen a similar freak-out from his William side as what happened to Angel. But because Spike was already drawing on his humanity before the soul, it makes the soul easier to bear.

Did *any* of that make sense?

Maggie (hey it's cool- we can't agree on everything.  The important thing is that we agree on *most* things ;) , yes, he experienced guilt, but guilt from what?  I think his guilt post soul came from hurting Buffy- not his past victims.  Like when he talked to Wood about killing his mother, he says something like those were the rules- "I was a vampire, she was a slayer," etc. 

In Angel s5, post soul, he tortures a man- a human being, but one who was not good, and withholding important info on Fred's deadly condition, and he didn't care about the screams and various fluids it took from the man to get there.  I bring all that up because it goes hand in hand with what I said about him... doing what's expected (from his demon), and is okay with it.  William coped with the torture because it was for the greater good, and the demon was good at it. 

Pigs blood and not killing the victim are alternatives, yes, but that was never done until Angel and his blood drenched soul, and chipped Spike (maybe the Immortal, but who cares?  He's way lame).  In a vampire's nature (Eowyn, not comparing them to animals, I'm just talking about their typical nature in general), they are supposed to kill.  Otherwise, a slayer wouldn't be referred to as a *vampire* slayer if they didn't have to be, or weren't in so much of an abundance of a threat to humans.  Vampires are supposed to be slayed because generally, they're going to kill someone.  I look at Spike and Angel not killing humans as the anomaly in the vampire world- they're the minority.  Then look at humans- there's good, and then there're serial killers and what not- the serial killers could be looked upon as being on the opposite end of the spectrum of Spike and Angel's non killing status is.  Humans aren't perfect, but murderers aren't the majority.

Okay, did that make any sense?

Oh, and Angel leaving the lawyers to die- I didn't see that as an Angelus thing- Angelus would not only have participated, he would have tortured them as well.  As was it really letting them die since (as someone pointed out), they all had contracts, and could be at work the next day?  Lindsay and Lilah didn't die, and Harlan, was it?  He came back or whatever.  Angel fires his friends, and *that* makes him like Angelus?  Come on- I didn't see a hint of leather pants. 

And I agree Eowyn on Spike coping better cause he'd already begun to change tremendously.

 Hey Scarlet -- Spike didn't feel guilty about killing the slayer because she was out to kill him, too.  That was a battle of warriors.  But he did feel guilty about killing 'innocents'.  He says so to Buffy when she first confronts him about the possibility that he's killing again after Conversations with Dead People.  And I totally respect that distinction -- Spike likes to see himself as a warrior.

And I'm with Eowyn about the rest.  To write it off as being "according to his nature" is to treat Spike like an animal.  To take that line actually plays into the ugliest Scoobie/Council lines about vampires.  "It's their nature to kill; they aren't PERSONS (i.e. they don't have a choice); therefore they can't change, etc. etc."  If we want to think that the Scoobies/Council were WRONG to not recognize that a vampire like Spike could choose to do good, then we have to admit that vampires can choose whether or not to kill people -- and to hold them accountable when they do choose to kill.  Don't see how you can have it both ways.

Eowyn, I also agree about why Spike coped better with the soul.  He'd already been changing.  Also, he chose to get it.  Angel, by contrast, was tormented by the soul because his demon side was in total rebellion from the whole soul-having thing.  He could never be 'whole'.  That's what makes him an interesting figure.  And it's also what makes it impossible for him to be a true hero.

Maggie, again, not talking about all vampires- however, isn't it fair to say that's how Spike would've initially seen it? "I am no longer bound to this mortal coil. I have become a creature of the night. A vampire."  Spike saw himself as superior to humans, and that humans were meant to be killed.  He refers to them as Happy Meals with Legs, the key word being meal.  And he sought out the Slayers- she wouldn't have been trying to kill him had he not purposely put himself in her field of vision.  Not saying that it has to be that way, that it has to be their nature, cause hey, Spike (and Harmony) proves that's not true without a soul- but it's percieved to be that way- all "I'm a vamp now, so I'm entitled to do this, that and the other."  If you honestly believe that you have the right to... whatever, then wouldn't you do it?  We've seen it up and down history as well as fiction.  In fact, in s6, when Spike (convinces himself to) attacks that woman when he thinks his chip is broken, what spurs that moment?  The fact that Buffy profusely says that nothing better is expected of him.  He's a monster, a vampire, a thing who kills.  So why not?  Had Drusilla been sane and... different, and away from Darla and Angelus, and she told William after his turning that yes, he was immortal, but we will not kill, we have a choice, he would've went with that too, IMO.  Of course, Spike can only do what he's told or what's expected of him for so long before he gets bored.  He'll start off following the rules, before breaking them completely.

Hm. To be honest, I really can't understand the whole "Anne was frustrated with William's clinginess" line of thought. I rewatched "Lies My Parent's Told Me" just to be sure, and I never saw any indication of annoyance or impatience on her part...not until she was vamped. Whether or not human-Anne liked his poetry (and unless she was deaf, she probably didn't) I got the sense that she enjoyed his sharing it with her. When she asks about Cecily and later tells him "She's lovely. You shouldn't be alone" I felt she was expressing a concern for what would happen to him after she passed away. At that point, she really was all he had. I seriously doubt he reached that point on his own, too. We have to hold her somewhat responsible for the man he became.

Also, lets not forget that Spike even tells Wood (in LMPTM) that his mum had said some nasty things to him, and it had been weighing on his mind for years. However, now he understood that when he turned her, he released a demon, and it was the demon talking, not his mother. This seems par for the course on BtVS. When humans are turned, a demon takes up residence in their body; they may retain the memories of the human; they may retain some basic personality traits. But clearly they are not the same being as before. Look at all the examples we have of this. Unlike most vamps, Spike really seemed to keep his basic humanity when he was turned. Only he gained a taste for blood and a taste for violence...neither one of which he bother to stifle. To me, that makes Spike a real anomoly, just as the writers said.

And Spike didn't just kill for food. He tortured people for fun. He even admitted it in season seven. So that, to me, indicates he doesn't get a get out of jail free card simply because he's an "animal." He knew right from wrong; he could choose to do right. But because he lacked a conscience to punish him with guilt, he happily went down the path of evil.

Basically, I believe that Spike was William at his core: a frustrated man that had never really felt empowered among his peers. Enter Dru, who made him incredibly strong, immortal, bloodthirsty, and without that nasty conscience to hold him back. It was insinuated in FFL that the first people Spike tortured were the gentlemen from the party, who were making fun of his poetry right before Cecily broke his heart. To me, this says that human-William probably fantasized about smiting their asses down, and as soon as Dru gave him the means to do so, he followed through with that fantasy. Afterward, he did not feel guilty in the least.

He did feel guilty for turning his mother, because he saw what a monster she became. So, obviously, he knew right from wrong. But he only chose to do right when it would negatively affect him to do wrong. In other words, in season 5 Spike was a hero for trying to save Dawn, but he was in essence a selfish hero because he was only saving her because of Buffy. As he said in "Intervention" he "couldn't live with her being in that much pain." So, he was really saving Dawn, so Buffy would feel good, so he could feel good. He knew that taking care of Dawn was the right thing to do, but if Buffy had told him to do otherwise, I seriously doubt he would have argued with her. After Buffy died, I think he stepped over into the realm of unselfish hero, because he chose to stay and take care of Dawn even after Buffy was gone. He stayed not because he was receiving any reward for it, but because he knew it was the right thing to do.

Um...does any of that make sense? :P

Wait UB- it wasn't just about Buffy's feelings, he says in "Forever" that he cared about all of the Summers women.  When he helped Dawn witht he resurrection spell, it had nothing to do with Buffy- he didn't want her to know.  He basically said he didn't want to see Dawn in so much pain.

And let's face it- a vampire's morals are different from a human's.  And did Spike torture the party goers with rail road spikes for vengeance?  Yes.  Did he torture during those twenty years he spent with Angelus?  Yes.  Why?  Because he was *competing* with him- the head rooster in the hen house.  That was his motivation for seeking out Slayers- to prove himself above Angelus.  Spike traditionally isn't into the easy victim or torture.  He's done it, yes, but not necessarily because he felt the need to do so.  He'll break your neck and be done with it before he'll string you up and torture you for days on end or play crazy head games with you till the brink of insanity.  There's the difference.

Spike and William's relationship is very complicated - we wonder if Spike's special because of his remaining humanity or is it common for vampires to have some connection with their previous lives left.

There are two writers who are - of course in my humble opinion - very close to the truth and these are Sanguine and Helga Von Nutwimpile. I absolutely recommend them to those who write William / Spike fics, their ideas are more than convincing. 

Sanguine reviewed seasons 5, 6 and 7 (http://www.sidhe.org/~amanda/sanguine/) and focused mainly on Spike's transformation during the series. There's a lot about Spike / William interaction in the reviews of season 7.

When he was alive, William was William. When he got sired, he became Spike. But when Spike retrieved his soul... He stopped being either of them. He's a strange mix of human and demon, stranger than Angel, 'cos Angel's human and demon parts don't agree to inhabit one body in a relative harmony like Spike's (or maybe William's) do - in Angel's case only one of his 'faces' can be dominating in one time. What is more, I have a feeling, that souled Spike is closer to William than to his demon self (Sanguine calls him even Spilliam to point out this duality). Spike's personality became some kind of a shield, a mask under which sensitive William hides from the cruel world. He's not strong enough to face the reality, it has always been breaking his heart and hurting him. On the other hand, Spike is respected. Spike is feared and it's easy to mislead people with Spike's cocky attitude. So that's what William does - he hides and misleads... He's a coward and he knows it. The thing is he can't show his weakness.

Scarlet, I actually did forget about that scene in "Forever." Thanks for reminding me. :)

Still, my opinion of Spike's motivations has not changed. He did the right thing when it helped those he loved, but until he got his soul, he did not do good just for the sake of being good. His actions were no less heroic to me because they were selfishly motivated, but they were, in a way, selfish. When those he loved hurt, he hurt, so of course he would want to avoid that at all costs and be willing to do anything to prevent it. He also would not have hesitated before doing something wrong if it helped someone he loved. He told Buffy in (I think) Doublemeat Palace, that she was too good for the place, and that if she needed money *he* could get her some. Now, how do we think he would get money? Certainly not by honest means. But he felt no guilt at the thought of lying/cheating/stealing/killing if it helped Buffy. That is what I mean when I say he did not have a human conscience any longer.

I've been reading this thread and I thought it would be useful to your discussion to added this bit of dialogue from the end of the episode "Damaged".

Spike: No. I did. The lass thought I killed her family. And I'm supposed to what, complain 'cause hers wasn't one of the hundreds of families I did kill? I'm not sayin' you're right... 'cause, uh... I'm physically incapable of saying that. But, uh... for a demon... I never did think that much about the nature of evil. No. Just threw myself in. Thought it was a party. I liked the rush. I liked the crunch. Never did look back at the victims. 

Angel: I couldn't take my eyes off them. I was only in it for the evil. It was everything to me. It was art. The destruction of a human being. I would've considered Dana a masterpiece.

Here's what I think.  The demon allowed William to yield to his darker impulses, so they had to exist in some kind of harmony.

In one of my stories, I likened being turned to moving into a furnished house.  You know someone has lived there before you,because you can see that they have left the furniture, but it is empty.  The soul is gone, but there still might be some influence felt.

I think it might be William's influence which allowed him to love the way he did.  And, it was William's influence that made Spike seek out his soul.  If the soul were truly gone, then Spike, or William, whoever was most in control in season seven, would have no reason to feel guilty for what he had done- at all.  

If William weren't at least somewhat aware of "Spike" why would he care?  It wasn't he who committed any horrible acts.  It was the monster that had taken his body.  Conversely, if Spike were truly a different entity, or unaware of William, he would not have even tried to do good, or even thought that seeking his soul would mean anything, to anyone.  

He would not have any reason to be better, because he wouldn't have cared- be it about Buffy or not.

I'd like to throw in another random data point if I may, though I don't remember the dialogue exactly (it's been a while).  When Willow's doppleganger visits, I remember a conversation with Angel in the library.  Someone comments on the degree to which a vampire resembles their former human self.  Angel jumps in with a comment that the human and vampire are nothing alike, but does so in a way that makes it obvious that he doesn't believe what he's saying and is covering up.

Am I remembering this scene right, and if so, wouldn't that imply that even Angel believed that the personality of the human influences or causes that of the vampire?  He just didn't want the Scoobies to think so for what it would imply about him.

pretty_in_fangs

UB- but humans lie/cheat/steal/kill as well- maybe the demon just gave William the stones or lack of inhabitions to do certain things that aren't beyond the norm for humans, or at least, something that a human is incapable of.  And he didn't always do good things out of love- sometimes it was survival or for the hell of it, like when he killed that demon that was going to kill Giles, Willow and Xander at the end of s4- after they finished that spell.  He said he did it so that they wouldn't kill them- but they were so disoriented from the spell, that the demon would have succeeded in killing them, or at least one of them.  So what was his motivation there?  Maybe he actually liked having them around...

And look at Faith- she didn't need a demon to kill people. And Lady Yashaka's quote- Spike more or less is saying that he did it cause everyone else was and it was fun (and Angel actually did it cause he liked to be evil- it was different).

Willow:  (appalled) It's horrible! That's me as a vampire? (Angel closes
the door) I'm so evil and... skanky. (aside to Buffy, worried) And I
think I'm kinda gay.

Buffy:  (reassuringly) Willow, just remember, a vampire's personality
has nothing to do with the person it was.

Angel:  (without thinking) Well, actually... (gets a look from Buffy)
That's a good point.

Actually, this just shows how close the demon and the soul (or humans memories) can be- Vampire Willow was evil, liked to torture, and was kinda gay.  Dark Willow was gay, evil enough to want to kill her friends, and was definitely gay.  In fact, Dark Willow may have been more evil then vamp Willow...

Here's the exerpt, Pretty

Willow:  (appalled) It's horrible! That's me as a vampire? (Angel closes
the door) I'm so evil and... skanky. (aside to Buffy, worried) And I
think I'm kinda gay.
Buffy:  (reassuringly) Willow, just remember, a vampire's personality
has nothing to do with the person it was.
Angel:  (without thinking) Well, actually... (gets a look from Buffy)
That's a good point.

Here's another quote from Spike (to Buffy in Fool for Love)

Becoming a vampire is a profound and powerful experience. I could feel this new strength coursing through me. Getting killed made me feel alive for the very first time. I was through living by society's rules.

I think Spike still had his conscience, but he had been deeply wounded by Cecily's rejection and the rudeness of the other people in the party.  At first, he's just thrilled to be with Drusilla (and get laid), then Angelus shows his the finer points of evil.  Spike eventually embraces evil because it lets him escape from the pain of the normal world where he's a wuss and a big mama's boy.  There is a great deal of posturing.  "Makes me feel all manly"  He needs his vampire prop to feel like a man.  IMHO.

Scarlet, if you reread my post, I never said that Spike needed the *demon* to lie, steal, cheat, or kill. The demon gave him his bloodlust--or rather, his need to feed on blood. He needed the lack of conscience to do it without feeling bad about killing. There are plenty of human beings with souls that lack conscience. This is why I believe Joss's description of what a "soul" is seems to be a bit skewed. To me, it seems that the demon enters, causes the need to feed, and the conscience leaves, allowing them to feed without feeling badly about it.

ETA: That is essentially what I don't understand about the canon. Some vampires rise complete monsters...mindless feeding machines right from the start. Others, like Holden and Spike, seem very much the same people they were before, only with evil impulses. So...do they retain their soul (what most people would define as the essence of their spirit) and simply lose their conscience? If so, why do others completely lose their sense of previous self and become a monster, like William's mother? Honestly, it seems like the writers put themselves in a corner on this issue and took the easy way out. If Spike was capable of telling right from wrong, and capable of *learning* to behave with empathy and unselfishness, why did he need to regain his soul at all? If he could do it, why couldn't all vampires?

You know UB, I totally forgot about the original question. Anyways, I'm going with c.  Also, I think Holden could've ended up being like Spike or Harmony, in the sense that he wouldn't be completely controlled by the blood lust or plain evilness if given a bit of time and some guidance of some sort.

Bah.  Interesting topic really, and we all know that Spike was just plain unique...  But do you think you could update soon?  Please.......

:getwriting:

Is that your own horse in your new icon, UB? Pretty face.

Yeah, the show got screwy. At some point, they needed to take a firm stance one way or another. Tell us specifically that Spike is an anomaly, or admit that all vampires had the same potential and the Council was wrong. That's one of the real problems I have with BTVS - the wishy-washy-ness.

CM

Maybe it's not Spike who's unique - maybe every demon is? Meaning, they're all different from each other and decide to play differently, too? So in some cases they just 'pull out' one's faults and evil features (Angel) and in other's they decide to make a completely different person (Spike)? Do you think those demons are in some way mindful or just subconscious?

CM, yes that's my boy. :) His name is Chance.

Cereza, I'm not really certain what your post means. You say that Spike became a completely different person? But there were very clear glimpses of William in Spike. When Spike got his soul back in season seven, he had no major personality changes at all. To me, this indicates that they are, in essence, the same person?

Or maybe I just misunderstood your post. If that's the case, please feel free to correct me. :P

I think what Cereza was saying is that, with Angel, the demon just emphasized his wicked impulses, making him evil, pretty much all demon, with no trace of humanity. But with Spike, the demon and the human come together in a way that is neither William nor demon, but something wholly different - Spike - that is made up of parts of both. Or maybe not... Cereza, feel free to tell me I'm full of crap, lol.

One thing that I *do* think is interesting to contemplate is the notion that all demons are unique. It's not that hard to see, considering we've seen lots of variety among non-vampire demons. There are plenty of demons that are friendly and not evil - Lorne, Clem, and Doyle are just three examples (okay, Doyle was half-human, and that might make a difference, but his whole species was non-violent). Why shouldn't the demons that inhabit vampires be any different? Maybe the reason Angelus was so evil was because his demon was eviler than most? Whereas Spike's demon had a more human-like personality, but with enough of a taste for fighting and destruction that he wasn't, like, Clem-nice until Buffy's influence. It could also explain why some vampires seem mindless when they burst out of the grave - there are an awful lot of non-vampire demons that aren't sentient, so there could be vampire demons like that, too.

Personalities could have something to do with bloodlines - maybe, for example, the Order of Aurelius produces more sentient demons than a weaker line. Or maybe the older the siring vampire, the stronger/more aware the fledgling is when it rises. That wouldn't explain the differences between Angel and Spike, but families don't have to be *exactly* alike.

Cereza, I agree that that makes the most sense- that each demon effects them differently.  However, I meant Spike was... well, that makes no sense when I just admitted that each vampire and their situation is different, so nevermind.  Oh, but I don't think that Spike is completely different from William, or even a whole other personality different.  They're very similar in many ways...  Strip away the violence and the posturing (and the make over), and there's William- a William without a soul or a pulse and drinks blood, but still that same, sensitive romantic...

And UB, Cereza's comment was a response to mine, I think.

Eowyn, you have a point too- Angelus was eviler than Spike, when they were both turned, they weren't like the average fledging.  In fact, would they even be considered fledgings, sense both their sires were Masters, or at least, of *the* Master's line?  Meh, I say judge each vamp individually- it's simpler that way then making one huge blanket statement.

Okay, my messages are a mess. Sorry about that, I didn't see that I wasn't clear.

While writing about Spike being unique - yes, I was referring to Scarlet Ibis.

And about Spike's demon... I do agree that in Spike's personality there is some (okay, a lot of) William left. As I wrote in my first post, I think that Spike's personality (specially after he got his soul back) was supposed to 'hide' William. But if we're talking about the demon, that took over William's body... IMO the said demon created Spike to be William's contrary. And Spike is - or rather should be. William was quiet - Spike's loud. William was shy - Spike's cocky and insolent... The problem is, that the demon didn't get rid of him and William's still there.

Well Darla once said that becoming a vampire meant you became more of what you already were.  William was love's bitch (his words....I think a romantic is a better description as well as a giver), a caretaker and a sensitive soul.  Spike was too but learned to hide the hurt with anger and used his vampiric strength to not take crapola off of anyone anymore (William likely thought about it but would have been pummeled).  I think his drinking was a way to dull the edges off the stuff his inner William had a bit of trouble dealing with.   I DO think he was unique in his control over the demon but then the demon was different too.

The DEMON was the one to agree to the soul getting.  Angel was the ONLY example of a souled vampire and the poof made it sound like the demon was pretty well gone when the soul was there.  That mean Spike's demon had to agree to what amounted to suicide just to be safe for and good enough for Buffy!!!!!  How many demons would risk that???  Unique for certain.

Not so unique was the control when need be (see Harmony and other W&H vamps in Angel's employ!).  Lot's of control to not do the human and to bag it!  

In truth I think the real unique vampire was Angelus.....his human, Liam, had little to hold on to and his demon was evil for evil's sake (even the Master was impressed).  He had no control over the demon without the soul and even with the soul his control was iffy.  His dreams with the soul were of the hunt and kill and reveling in it! (Even if he DID brood about it later).  He was ALL about the evil, the hunt, the torture, the kill ,etc.  Other vamps on the shows had other shadings.  Maybe Angelus was the odd vamp out??

Kathleen

Kathleen - where does Darla say that? I vaguely remember the sentiment, but I'm blanking on a scene. Do you think what she said is true? It seems to fit most of the vampires we've seen with well-developed characters (namely, the big four) - but I don't know about the little piddling extras.

I'd also disagree that the demon is gone when the soul is restored. If Angel said that, he's full of crap. The demon was still there - he still had the bloodlust, and to some extent the desire to kill and torture (witness all the evil things he did as Angel) but for the most part, he suppressed those urges. And I would argue that he didn't suppress them because he was *good* - rather, he suppressed them because he knew the soul would torment him about it if he gave in.

And I don't think Angelus was unique by being totally evil - because, again, we have those piddling extras whose only job is to kill things so Buffy can kill them. We've seen plenty of vamps whose only instinct is to hunt and kill.

I feel like this debate could go around and around forever, because the fact is - the show is way inconsistent. There's one set of standards for the vampires we've seen as well-developed characters, and a totally different behavior from vamps we only see for a minute or two. And even within those subsets there is a ton of variation. It appears there is no unifying theory of vampires. There's plenty of evidence to support almost any theory you could come up with - which is why I'm liking the "every demon is unique" idea, lol.

I believe it was when we get the flashback to Angel's turning, etc.? Was probably part of that discussion after Angelus had killed his family, and he's still feeling all the emotions for his father, etc., that killing them didn't erase the hurt and anger.......