Damaged Souls
Jan. 29th, 2004 10:54 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatHad a conversation with my mother recently about John Steinbeck's EAST OF EDEN, the conversation focused on something that I've been struggling with internly for a while now and that is these nasty human emotions.
Emotions you don't say or write out loud, for fear someone will think poorly of you. Envy, jealousy, anger, rage...Steinbeck is an interesting writer - one who does not back down from discussing the more negative aspects of humanity. In East of Eden, he makes a very strong case for accepting our imperfections. Our capacity for cruelty, meanness - is partly what does make us human. And like it or not, we all have it inside of us.
Monsters.
I don't know how many people out there have actually met a human monster. I have. I have sat across from a human being who killed for selfish purposes and showed no remorse for those killings. He touched my hand. I visited with him. I looked into his eyes. It is not an experience I will forget and it is not one I've seen replicated well onscreen. What was unforgettable about the experience was the person on the other side of that small coffee table we sat at, was human. He was not evil. He was not good. He claimed he was innocent, and I wanted to believe him. But after several visits, discussions with his attorneys, and a thorough inspection of the evidence, I realized he wasn't. He was a hit man. He killed others for money. Didn't think about it. Didn't look back. Each paycheck he got he put towards his dope habit. Until he was finally caught and locked away in Leavenworth Penitentiary.
Looking at this wreck of a human being, and he was a wreck with needle marks up his arms, yellowing eyes, and a slur, my niavete and innocence melted away. No longer would I look at murderers the same way. I couldn't. Because what I saw in front of me was not a monster, it was a man. Who had comitted horrible acts.
I also realized the words of my old criminal defense professor were true: "There but for the grace of god go I." Circumstance, luck, enviroment, genetics, etc had saved me from becoming a monster like this man had become.
What creates a Monster? Is it one act? OR several? The recent movie, MONSTER by Patty Jenkins demonstrates that it takes several acts over time. Most serial killers were abused horribly as children. They weren't born monsters. They didn't come out of the womb that way. Some were raped as children, beaten, tortured, mentally and physically abused. Their families ripped from them. Or they just couldn't connect to them anymore. So psychologically traumatized that in the end they retreated to that world permanently takening out their pain on others.
Not all people who are abused become Monsters. Our lives are not predestined. And the horrible abuse we suffer at the hands of others does not in any way justify the acts we do ourselves. We do have choices.
Even though at times it seems like we don't. That we are compelled to do things. Part of our struggle, is saying no. Not giving into the compulsion.
I keep coming back to two things that revolve over and over in my head...1. people don't become monsters over night, its more than one act, one circumstance that creates them and 2. what role does society play in the creation of human monsters...do we in fact create our own? By our inability to stop at any point what is happening, to intervene, and our own human imperfections which get in the way of helping?
I've found the posts on last night's Angel episode about Spike interesting and lovely, *but* they all are skipping around something that has been bugging me since I first read the spoilers for it.
How to put this into words? Dana...is someone who was become a monster due to what has been done to her by others without her consent. ATS touched on this lightly with Untouched - about a woman who unknowingly uses her telekinesis to hurt others. She was molested as a child and that experience caused this reaction. The difference between Dana and the girl in Untouched, is will. Dana wants to hurt and actually seems to enjoy it. The girl in Untouched didn't want to hurt, her power was doing it without her will. Both girls had their power pushed to the surface by an external entity - with the girl in Untouched it was Lilah and W&H, with Dana it's Buffy and Willow. Both also were damaged as children. Both had a doctor with ulterior motives.
What's important about both cases here - is it's not just one person, it's a group of people - the worse violators may actually be the well-intentioned ones.
1. Walter the serial killer. He traumatized her. Tortured her. Killed her family. Walter was worse than the vampires. Why? Because he did have a soul. He wasn't a demon. He was human. He didn't kill to drink blood and sustain himself. And don't misunderstand me to say that this justifies the vampires evil - it doesn't. I'm just pointing out a distinction.
2. The Doctor who is using Dana to write a book. Instead of figuring out what is wrong with her, he is using her a bit like a guinea pig. Keeping her doped up, video taping sessions. Keeping notes. Seeing her as a file on a desk.
3. Buffy and Willow - who decided to share Buffy's slayer powers with every potential slayer in the universe. Not knowing who these girls were, what their mental state currently was, and what sharing these powers might do to them. Andrew claims that was entirely unforeseen. Hmmm. Buffy has had the powers for seven years, has hated having them, been tormented with dreams she didn't understand and when she first got them was quickly tracked down and aided. That was when just one slayer got chosen. She didn't foresee
what this would do to people? Plus she does it so she can build an army of girls to go out and kill vampires?
This has disturbed me since Chosen. Maybe because I don't see female empowerment the same way Whedon does, I don't see it as being physical. Fred to me is an incredibly powerful woman and she is not physically powerful nor has great magics. Tara was also incredibly powerful. And I'd like to add Cordelia who tried to help the world day by day with painful visions. What Buffy and Willow did last year reminds me a great deal of what Cordelia did with Jasmine and what is happening with Angel...the puppet images.
It disturbs me.
What did Buffy's power do to poor Dana? It inflicted thousands of years of nightmares on someone who was already having nightmares. It inflicted power on someone who was filled with rage and wanted to inflict that rage on anyone who stopped by. And she does. She kills over 10 innocent people in this episode and she does it horribly. Buffy's power turned Dana into a killing machine. That disturbs me. And it never occurred to Buffy that this would happen?
I'm not sure if these are the questions the writers intended and since no one else seems to be asking them, maybe it's just me. Not sure.
Regarding Spike and Angel. This is the part of the episode I enjoyed. It didn't disturb me that much and it was about time the writers addressed these two characters issues.
While I had no problems with the mutilation of Spike - and the hands image. Lovely metaphor. Don't feel the need to analyze it since so many others already have. Ramses2 and morgain on ASSB wrote amazing posts analyzing it when spoilers came out this fall. I'm more interested in patterns - such as the use of physical torture to examine Spike's character as opposed to psychological torture.
The writers certainly like to physically torture Spike, don't they?
A brief list:
1. S2 What's My Line - Killed by Death: Spike hit by pipe organ, burned and in a wheel chair, tormented.
2. S3 Lover's Walk - drunk, burns his hand...actually gets off pretty well this season
3. S4 The Iniative - gets a chip in his head that makes it impossible for him to kill anything
4. S5 Is tortured by Glory and almost killed
5. S6 Is beaten up by Buffy and tortured in trials while getting a soul
6. S7 Is tortured, crucified and (it is implied, raped) by the First Evil's ubervamp and burns up saving the world
ATS
1. Conviction - comes back to life burning
2. Just Rewards - can't touch or feel anything
3. Unleashed - is being pulled to hell and can't control his visibility and can't leave
5. Hellbound - is being tortured by a ghost in numerous ways
6. Damage - has his hands cut off....
For some reason they rely on psychological torture for Angel and physical torture for Spike - to motivate character development. Not that Angel isn't going to get his fair share of the physical torture this year or hasn't been physically tortured in the past, but the emphasis has always been more psychological. I wonder if this is yet another way of distinquishing the characters - Spike is more physical than Angel, he's all about the body, the experience, while Angel is cereberal, all about the mind, and overthinks it. Their descriptions of how they looked at victims certainly support this:
Spike states that as a demon he never really saw the victims themselves, just bodies to kill. The rush. The crunch. This explains why when he discovers he can kill demons in Doomed, he's thrilled. He gets off on the rush of the kill. Who the victim is doesn't really matter to him. Demon? Human? Not a biggie. Someone online, can't remember where, (problem with lurking in so many places is you forget where you read things), stated that this made sense: Spike is chaotic evil, chaos doesn't think about victims or consequences - it just rips through, remember the little girl in the white room way back in S3 Forgiving mentions chaotic evil. For Spike - evil wasn't really a thought. He didn't care. It explains why he does what he does for Buffy in S4-6, occassionally helping. He does it not because its good or evil, but because it's fun. It's a party. It's a rush. Spike is in many ways a lot like the hired gun I mention above - the hit man who kills for the adrenaline rush and the next hit. Doesn't matter which side he does the hits for, he just does them. Makes him unpredictable, impossible to control, because he has no allegiances, he just does whatever feels good at the time.
Angel on the other hand, was in it for the evil. For Angel it is all about the individual victim. Angel is organized, structured in how he approaches things. Analytical. Calculated. He's a lot like Holland Manners of Wolfram and Hart, or Lindsey and Lilah, or
the little girl in the white room. To him, the fun was in the plan. In how you destroy the person, break them down, bit by bit.
How they go about finding Dana - emphasizes these two very different takes as well.
Angel thinks it through. Asks advice. Questions the nurse. Looks at the data. Analyzes it. Considers his options. He's very orderly. Had Wes call Buffy's group. Even sets up a tactical team to back him up. Order.
Spike rushes out and does it. Gets the info he needs.
Then takes off. Impulse. Chaotic. He finds the girl faster than Angel, using his body to do so. His sense of smell. His hearing. His senses. Angel uses the technology of W&H.
So it does make sense - that to push Angel's buttons - you go with the psychological torment. With Spike? You hurt his body. You go after his senses.
Angel - we get flashbacks, or visions of the victims that he spent so much time turning into monsters.
Spike - we get incorporeality, dragging to hell, cut off hands.
Angel- his dreams and mind is attacked with images.
Spike - his senses are removed or attacked, he can't feel, he can't touch, he can't smell.
Angel comes to an epiphany when a parasite gives him bad dreams. Spike when his hands are cut off.
It's interesting to me how this show demonstrates how order and chaos interrelate, how both are necessary but can also lead to evil. And it's equally interesting how they compare and contrast the use of physical and psychological images to examine character.
A bit of a ramble I'm afraid. Thoughts still way too cloudy by other things to remain coherent.
Overall a good episode. I actually enjoyed Andrew in it. Shocking I know. ;-)
Another frigid day outside with windchills. Ugh. Was hoping for a walk outside. Stretch my legs. Shake off the cabin fever and the growing feeling of isolation, which maybe adding to my irritiability.
Emotions you don't say or write out loud, for fear someone will think poorly of you. Envy, jealousy, anger, rage...Steinbeck is an interesting writer - one who does not back down from discussing the more negative aspects of humanity. In East of Eden, he makes a very strong case for accepting our imperfections. Our capacity for cruelty, meanness - is partly what does make us human. And like it or not, we all have it inside of us.
Monsters.
I don't know how many people out there have actually met a human monster. I have. I have sat across from a human being who killed for selfish purposes and showed no remorse for those killings. He touched my hand. I visited with him. I looked into his eyes. It is not an experience I will forget and it is not one I've seen replicated well onscreen. What was unforgettable about the experience was the person on the other side of that small coffee table we sat at, was human. He was not evil. He was not good. He claimed he was innocent, and I wanted to believe him. But after several visits, discussions with his attorneys, and a thorough inspection of the evidence, I realized he wasn't. He was a hit man. He killed others for money. Didn't think about it. Didn't look back. Each paycheck he got he put towards his dope habit. Until he was finally caught and locked away in Leavenworth Penitentiary.
Looking at this wreck of a human being, and he was a wreck with needle marks up his arms, yellowing eyes, and a slur, my niavete and innocence melted away. No longer would I look at murderers the same way. I couldn't. Because what I saw in front of me was not a monster, it was a man. Who had comitted horrible acts.
I also realized the words of my old criminal defense professor were true: "There but for the grace of god go I." Circumstance, luck, enviroment, genetics, etc had saved me from becoming a monster like this man had become.
What creates a Monster? Is it one act? OR several? The recent movie, MONSTER by Patty Jenkins demonstrates that it takes several acts over time. Most serial killers were abused horribly as children. They weren't born monsters. They didn't come out of the womb that way. Some were raped as children, beaten, tortured, mentally and physically abused. Their families ripped from them. Or they just couldn't connect to them anymore. So psychologically traumatized that in the end they retreated to that world permanently takening out their pain on others.
Not all people who are abused become Monsters. Our lives are not predestined. And the horrible abuse we suffer at the hands of others does not in any way justify the acts we do ourselves. We do have choices.
Even though at times it seems like we don't. That we are compelled to do things. Part of our struggle, is saying no. Not giving into the compulsion.
I keep coming back to two things that revolve over and over in my head...1. people don't become monsters over night, its more than one act, one circumstance that creates them and 2. what role does society play in the creation of human monsters...do we in fact create our own? By our inability to stop at any point what is happening, to intervene, and our own human imperfections which get in the way of helping?
I've found the posts on last night's Angel episode about Spike interesting and lovely, *but* they all are skipping around something that has been bugging me since I first read the spoilers for it.
How to put this into words? Dana...is someone who was become a monster due to what has been done to her by others without her consent. ATS touched on this lightly with Untouched - about a woman who unknowingly uses her telekinesis to hurt others. She was molested as a child and that experience caused this reaction. The difference between Dana and the girl in Untouched, is will. Dana wants to hurt and actually seems to enjoy it. The girl in Untouched didn't want to hurt, her power was doing it without her will. Both girls had their power pushed to the surface by an external entity - with the girl in Untouched it was Lilah and W&H, with Dana it's Buffy and Willow. Both also were damaged as children. Both had a doctor with ulterior motives.
What's important about both cases here - is it's not just one person, it's a group of people - the worse violators may actually be the well-intentioned ones.
1. Walter the serial killer. He traumatized her. Tortured her. Killed her family. Walter was worse than the vampires. Why? Because he did have a soul. He wasn't a demon. He was human. He didn't kill to drink blood and sustain himself. And don't misunderstand me to say that this justifies the vampires evil - it doesn't. I'm just pointing out a distinction.
2. The Doctor who is using Dana to write a book. Instead of figuring out what is wrong with her, he is using her a bit like a guinea pig. Keeping her doped up, video taping sessions. Keeping notes. Seeing her as a file on a desk.
3. Buffy and Willow - who decided to share Buffy's slayer powers with every potential slayer in the universe. Not knowing who these girls were, what their mental state currently was, and what sharing these powers might do to them. Andrew claims that was entirely unforeseen. Hmmm. Buffy has had the powers for seven years, has hated having them, been tormented with dreams she didn't understand and when she first got them was quickly tracked down and aided. That was when just one slayer got chosen. She didn't foresee
what this would do to people? Plus she does it so she can build an army of girls to go out and kill vampires?
This has disturbed me since Chosen. Maybe because I don't see female empowerment the same way Whedon does, I don't see it as being physical. Fred to me is an incredibly powerful woman and she is not physically powerful nor has great magics. Tara was also incredibly powerful. And I'd like to add Cordelia who tried to help the world day by day with painful visions. What Buffy and Willow did last year reminds me a great deal of what Cordelia did with Jasmine and what is happening with Angel...the puppet images.
It disturbs me.
What did Buffy's power do to poor Dana? It inflicted thousands of years of nightmares on someone who was already having nightmares. It inflicted power on someone who was filled with rage and wanted to inflict that rage on anyone who stopped by. And she does. She kills over 10 innocent people in this episode and she does it horribly. Buffy's power turned Dana into a killing machine. That disturbs me. And it never occurred to Buffy that this would happen?
I'm not sure if these are the questions the writers intended and since no one else seems to be asking them, maybe it's just me. Not sure.
Regarding Spike and Angel. This is the part of the episode I enjoyed. It didn't disturb me that much and it was about time the writers addressed these two characters issues.
While I had no problems with the mutilation of Spike - and the hands image. Lovely metaphor. Don't feel the need to analyze it since so many others already have. Ramses2 and morgain on ASSB wrote amazing posts analyzing it when spoilers came out this fall. I'm more interested in patterns - such as the use of physical torture to examine Spike's character as opposed to psychological torture.
The writers certainly like to physically torture Spike, don't they?
A brief list:
1. S2 What's My Line - Killed by Death: Spike hit by pipe organ, burned and in a wheel chair, tormented.
2. S3 Lover's Walk - drunk, burns his hand...actually gets off pretty well this season
3. S4 The Iniative - gets a chip in his head that makes it impossible for him to kill anything
4. S5 Is tortured by Glory and almost killed
5. S6 Is beaten up by Buffy and tortured in trials while getting a soul
6. S7 Is tortured, crucified and (it is implied, raped) by the First Evil's ubervamp and burns up saving the world
ATS
1. Conviction - comes back to life burning
2. Just Rewards - can't touch or feel anything
3. Unleashed - is being pulled to hell and can't control his visibility and can't leave
5. Hellbound - is being tortured by a ghost in numerous ways
6. Damage - has his hands cut off....
For some reason they rely on psychological torture for Angel and physical torture for Spike - to motivate character development. Not that Angel isn't going to get his fair share of the physical torture this year or hasn't been physically tortured in the past, but the emphasis has always been more psychological. I wonder if this is yet another way of distinquishing the characters - Spike is more physical than Angel, he's all about the body, the experience, while Angel is cereberal, all about the mind, and overthinks it. Their descriptions of how they looked at victims certainly support this:
Spike states that as a demon he never really saw the victims themselves, just bodies to kill. The rush. The crunch. This explains why when he discovers he can kill demons in Doomed, he's thrilled. He gets off on the rush of the kill. Who the victim is doesn't really matter to him. Demon? Human? Not a biggie. Someone online, can't remember where, (problem with lurking in so many places is you forget where you read things), stated that this made sense: Spike is chaotic evil, chaos doesn't think about victims or consequences - it just rips through, remember the little girl in the white room way back in S3 Forgiving mentions chaotic evil. For Spike - evil wasn't really a thought. He didn't care. It explains why he does what he does for Buffy in S4-6, occassionally helping. He does it not because its good or evil, but because it's fun. It's a party. It's a rush. Spike is in many ways a lot like the hired gun I mention above - the hit man who kills for the adrenaline rush and the next hit. Doesn't matter which side he does the hits for, he just does them. Makes him unpredictable, impossible to control, because he has no allegiances, he just does whatever feels good at the time.
Angel on the other hand, was in it for the evil. For Angel it is all about the individual victim. Angel is organized, structured in how he approaches things. Analytical. Calculated. He's a lot like Holland Manners of Wolfram and Hart, or Lindsey and Lilah, or
the little girl in the white room. To him, the fun was in the plan. In how you destroy the person, break them down, bit by bit.
How they go about finding Dana - emphasizes these two very different takes as well.
Angel thinks it through. Asks advice. Questions the nurse. Looks at the data. Analyzes it. Considers his options. He's very orderly. Had Wes call Buffy's group. Even sets up a tactical team to back him up. Order.
Spike rushes out and does it. Gets the info he needs.
Then takes off. Impulse. Chaotic. He finds the girl faster than Angel, using his body to do so. His sense of smell. His hearing. His senses. Angel uses the technology of W&H.
So it does make sense - that to push Angel's buttons - you go with the psychological torment. With Spike? You hurt his body. You go after his senses.
Angel - we get flashbacks, or visions of the victims that he spent so much time turning into monsters.
Spike - we get incorporeality, dragging to hell, cut off hands.
Angel- his dreams and mind is attacked with images.
Spike - his senses are removed or attacked, he can't feel, he can't touch, he can't smell.
Angel comes to an epiphany when a parasite gives him bad dreams. Spike when his hands are cut off.
It's interesting to me how this show demonstrates how order and chaos interrelate, how both are necessary but can also lead to evil. And it's equally interesting how they compare and contrast the use of physical and psychological images to examine character.
A bit of a ramble I'm afraid. Thoughts still way too cloudy by other things to remain coherent.
Overall a good episode. I actually enjoyed Andrew in it. Shocking I know. ;-)
Another frigid day outside with windchills. Ugh. Was hoping for a walk outside. Stretch my legs. Shake off the cabin fever and the growing feeling of isolation, which maybe adding to my irritiability.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 07:21 pm (UTC)Okay, now I don't think you're giving Spike enough credit! Spike, at the very least, has "Doyle" his Vision Guy. Fake or not, Lindsey is someone in Spike's life now. And Spike has always been one to make connections in the demon world. He buys his blood now, I assume, so he must know some of the vamps, the butchers, the people on the streets. I'm sure he's made contacts. (Or he will, if he continues this S1 Angel routine Lindsey has him on.)
But yeah, Spike is (or was, as of "Soul Purpose") cut off from anyone who could be called his friend. Hopefully that last scene with Angel goes toward forging a bond that will be a life-saver to both vamps. They both need every friend they can get!
But Angel isn't exactly a slouch at reading body language either. I'm not saying he works on intuition the way Spike does -- but hey, it was Angel who figured out Gunn had murdered the professor, even though he never gave a hint he knew until he became Angelus. But anyway.
You ask Angel what blood smells like, he'll say "I don't know, blood"
Um. I'm not trying to pick on this point, but when did Angel say this? If I've forgotten, I apologise, but I don't remember this line.
I don't think the writers are stating technology in of itself is bad here, I think that relying too much on it can be.
Yeah, I think you're right here. In relying on W&H resources, in using their tools, law and procedure and protocol, the AI team is conforming to a way of life, of doing things that wasn't/isn't their own. But that's why I'm wondering about the parallels of W&H and the Council. Does the simple fact that you have money and paper-pushers working for you turn you into ineffectual fighters for good? Does the "medium", so to speak, change the "message"?
Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 07:33 pm (UTC)I should make clear that I don't consider one type of behavior superior to the other.
How about this?
Angel is a thinking personality - by that I mean cereberal, someone who is analytical, clinical. Who uses reason and often will detach. We see this with scientists, doctors, lawyers. Angelus was very much like this. Techs. I'm not saying they aren't emotional. They are. Heck most of the people online are probably this typed of personality. They just use "reason" or "head" to make decisions. They tend to be leaders.
Spike is a feeling personality - by this I mean, someone who goes with his gut. What he feels. These people tend to be poets, artists, creative types. They also wear their hearts on their sleeve. Their decisions tend to be made with the heart or their blood. They don't make very good leaders.
Of course we all fall a bit within the spectrum of the two...not extremes, so you will see a little of each trait in each vamp. Spike goes with his gut. Angel with his head, 9 times out of 10. There are exceptions.
Angel doesn't tell you what blood smells like, he ignores you or doesn't say how he could tell - examples:
Cautionary Tale (it's Spike who explains it to the others), the tracking in S1, S2, - look back over the seasons does Angel ever explain his tracking? He's quiet about it.
I'm not saying one quality is better than the other, I don't think Spike's stupid. He's actually very bright.
And I don't think Angel's cold - he's actually very emotional. What I'm saying is they deal with the world differently. One physically. One cereberally.
Not sure if that made sense.
Agree one isn't better than the other
Date: 2004-01-29 09:48 pm (UTC)And Buffy's right there, with the oil and maybe a mud pit ;)
But anyway, in regards to Angel as cerebral... I can't deny it. Angel, especially when he's channeling his Angelus self, is coldly analytical in his planning. Which isn't to say he doesn't feel a hell of a lot (which I think we agree on), cuz how you plan isn't the same as how you feel about how you plan. But there's plenty of times when Angel tries to lock away that analytical part of himself. I'm thinking of all the times he's reacted with his gut, done the really stupid let's kick some ass without thinking of even a basic plan thing plenty of times. Like, say, "Over the Rainbow" or, well, most of early S3 when he relies on Wes to do the big planning.
And I do think Spike can make a good leader. Not saying he's always the brains of the operation, or the motivator (Dru was often the real motivator) but he held together a gang of vamps in S2, he overthrew the Anointed and made those minions obey him. He had the good idea to videotape Buffy's fights so he could analyse them. So I do think he has leadership abilities. But yeah, he isn't usually, or even naturally, the leader.
Basically, I think both vamps are more in the middle of the spectrum than you do. That's okay, we're allowed to differ :)
Re: Agree one isn't better than the other
Date: 2004-01-29 09:56 pm (UTC)I think the best way to look at them is the way you'd look at a sibling. They are like brothers after all.
You think the reason you and the sibling don't get along is your differences, but actually it's the similarities.
When people ask if you are alike - you declare - no, we're as different as night and day, yet to an objective observer? You have more in common than you know. Yet there are differences or slight variations in your behavior. You are alike yet come at things differently.
Angel says off-white, Spike insists white. And no one knows you better than that sibling, no one can push your buttons quicker. No one brings out the worst in you quite like they do.
It's an odd relationship. I find Spike a far more interesting character on ATS than on BTVS, just as I find Angel far more interesting on ATS than BTVS. And together? They are fascinating because of the things they bring out in each other. They make good foils.