Should Willow have Done that Spell in Becoming?

[shadowkat]

During my discussion with gabrielleabelle in her post regarding Xander in Becoming, and my own re-watch of the series along with the reading of the comics, I'm wondering about that resouling spell in Becoming that Willow did. Online, I've seen numerous discussions about whether Xander was right to lie to Buffy about the spell, but I've never seen anyone discuss whether Willow was right to do it. Whether Buffy was right to ask her to. And whether Giles was right to endorse it.

Should Willow have ever attempted to re-ensoul Angel? Should she have done it twice? Let alone once? And was Xander right about Willow not doing the spell re-ensouling him?

[ETC: I really have no idea where I stand on this one.
In other words: Sort of agnostic. I can argue it both ways. Just throwing the arguments out there to see what everyone else thinks. ]



If Willow hadn't done it - Angelus would either still be in hell or have come back in S3 to torment Buffy until she staked him. Also Willow would not have had the power she got, or been able to do the spells she did to help her friends. On the other hand, she also would not have gotten addicted to magic. I don't know if she and Tara would have ended up together. She may have gotten killed by someone in S3. Also Buffy would not have been able to join with her friends to defeat Adam. There is of course no evidence this is true. If Willow hadn't done it - Buffy may have stayed in Sunnydale or come back sooner. Faith may have not turned against them. Spike may have gotten staked at Buffy's hands. Riley and Buffy may have succeeded as a couple. Any number of different events may have happened. Hard to know.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

But all of this is irrelevant because we do not know what would have happened had she not done it. It's like asking yourself what would have happened if you didn't walk into a coffee house on a given day. So let's put that aside for the time being.

Should Willow have done it from a tactical perspective and an ethical one?

The Spell

The spell - according to Jenny Calendar's Uncle - who knew the spell, it was a black vengeance curse, one of the worst imaginable. Not about justice. But vengeance. Angel was meant to suffer, always. To never feel a moment of happiness or relief from the pain. The moment he does, he becomes Angelus.

The spell was created for the sole purpose of vengeance by the oldest of their clan to curse Angelus for raping and murdering their favored daughter, a young girl about Buffy's age who was chaste. [Surprise/Innocence S2] It was also untranslated, very old, and lost years ago. The spell is over 100 years old.

Jenny Calendar had to hunt the spell down, translate it, and hunt the ingredients. Also Jenny, who was a technowitch and a gypsey, did not know if she would be able to perform it. Plus, Jenny is about ten to fifteen years older than Willow and trained, she is not a novice and practices the religion. Not only that, it is her heritage. Jenny inherited it from her family as did Tara. We've also been told in Passion that the spell is difficult to do and the translation not necessarily accurate. What Jenny is attempting is according to her uncle, Jenny, and the shop-keeper, dangerous and challenging. Jenny also keeps what she is doing from Giles.

Willow and the Spell

When Willow gets the translation, she has not really been practicing magic at all. Just a few things here and there that she's found on websites and on Jenny's computer, but nothing has worked. She's decided that she can do it. Even though it is a dangerous spell. Giles is even a little skeptical. But they are desperate.

Note - Willow is not magical up to this point. She is just wickedly bright. She has no power that we know of. And she has not studied other languages. Nor does she know the history of the spell or its purpose.

So Willow does the spell, while Buffy distracts Angelus. Not realizing that Angelus has sent his cronies to grab Giles and kill Buffy's friends. Willow's focus on the spell and her friends focus on Willow, leaves them open to attack. Kendra is on guard-duty, but Kendra gave her weapon, Mr. Pointy to Buffy. It's an arrogant ploy. And Willow is knocked unconscious, Xander breaks his arm, Kendra is killed, and Giles is kidnapped.

After Willow comes to, Buffy does not ask for her to do the spell again. She tells Xander that that was her mistake. She should never have done it. Xander agrees. But Willow tells Xander that she is resolved. She's doing that spell and orders OZ and Cordelia to help her.

Willow has suffered a severe head injury. She was unconscious for quite some time and hospitalized. She is weak and fragile. Also possibly on medication. A bit foggy. The spell she is planning on trying is an old, complicated, gypsey spell that has been translated from another language and part of it, she has to speak in that language. It is also a vengeance spell. Does not matter what your motivation - the intent of the spell is vengeance. That was what it was created for. But Willow insists to Xander, OZ and Cordy - despite their protests to the contrary - that she should do it anyway. I don't know if Giles would have or could have stopped her.

Angel and the Spell
Angelus has made it clear he doesn't want to have a soul. He had one and is happy that it is gone. If he gets re-ensouled it is against his will. This is not something he would choose.

Re-ensouling Angelus is actually not that different than giving him a chip in his head, although the soul possibly makes him less likely to hurt people. The ethical quandry here has previously been examined in other works of literature - notably Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, Alfred Bester's Demolished Man, and Anthony Burgess' Clockwork Orange. Heart of Darkness is about how we, with the best of intentions, fight evil with evil and what results. Demolished Man is about how a hardened criminal is rehabilitated by giving him the equivalent of a conscience and wiping his old personality. And Clockwork Orange is about behavior modification.

It is quandry. Do you kill the demon or rehabilitate it?

On the other hand, re-ensouling Angelus does give him a choice on whether he should be evil or not. The demon skewed evil. But the man, may not. Even if it is a curse, it does provide him with the choice to rise above it. Also there's nothing about the curse that says he can't choose to ignore the pain and just kill. As Dru tells Spike regarding the chip, all wires in the brain, they lie, you can be a bad dog if you want to - the same goes with a soul. And as Lilah demonstrates...souls don't keep you from doing bad things, or the Mayor states to Spike: a soul is slipperier than a greased eel, why do you think I sold mine? All a soul does is give you a choice. BUT, does it give you a choice if you are cursed with it? If the moment you feel happiness or bliss, it is removed? The metaphor may be power - as Angelus, Angel had a lot of power, he was considered the worst thing - and people followed him. He created monsters. Did as he pleased. Took what he wanted. Yet, did he really have any power? In Destiny - he seems to tell Spike they have none, that nothing is theirs. He enjoyed the ability to torture and maime things without caring. To glory in it. As Angel - he is powerless. Doesn't even have the ability to choose to have a soul. It's foisted on him. He is in a prison of sorts.

Would he choose a soul? Probably not, although we have no way of knowing...if he might have - had it been a chip instead of soul Willow placed inside him. I'm guessing not, because to Angelus the soul restricts him, forces him to do things, is an authority over him. Is his father inside his head never to go away. The Fruedian super-ego. Remember Angelus killed his father. With a soul, his father won't leave.

The Consequences of the Spell

Willow's choice to do it, at the time she did, may well have doomed her. She opened a door that she could not close. When the spell happens, it is not Willow's voice that we hear, but someone else's and something goes through Willow, her eyes turn pitch black, she acts possessed. Then when it is gone, she wilts against OZ, her voice her own again. Willow's voice under the influence of the spell is the same as it is in Bargaining and in Two to Go and Grave. The entity she released, gave her power to do the spell, but at what cost? In resouling Angel, did Willow lose herself?

The spell also caused a rift to happen. Angel had to be sent to hell either way. There was no avoiding that. Even if Buffy had known about the spell, she still would have sent Angel to hell. She couldn't stop him from grabbing the sword out of Acathla. Her knowledge of the spell being done would not have changed the fact that she had to fight minions while Spike was fighting Dru. What caused the rift in the friendships, and it is ironic, was in a way Willow's spell. Buffy leaves because she killed Angel not Angelus. And, her friends knew about it. Not only did they know, they did the spell without telling her. That betrayal was probably more than she could stomach. It's a double whammy. That's why not telling her was a tactical error on Xander's part - he inadvertently caused the rift in their friendship. Buffy is less open with Xander and Willow after Becoming, partly due to that spell and the lie.

What happens to Willow after the spell? When Buffy returns from LA and her own personal hell, she finds out that Willow has been doing a lot of magic. Willow literally turned out all the electricity on her block. Willow is radiating power. Anya senses it. As does Amy. The power though is not Willow's - she got it from the spell, when she opened that door. Willow's path was more or less charted at that moment, when she chose to re-ensoul Angel from her hospital bed.

Is Angel better off ensouled? Is the world he lives in? Hard to say. I think the viewers are better off, because it's a better story. And I'm glad they did it that way. But from an omniscient, objective stance - I don't know.

I'm also not sure any more if we were supposed to think Willow doing that spell was a good thing? It certainly hasn't turned out to necessarily be a good thing. And the show is first and foremost a horror series. The authorial intent can be argued in more than one way.

Is Willow better off? Is Buffy?

Xander and the Spell - Was Xander right about the spell?

Was Xander right? I think based on what Xander knew at the time and his knowledge of vampires, he was as justified in his point of view. He had no real reason to trust Angel or vampires in general. School Hard - Angel literally offers Xander to Spike as bait, without telling Xander. And makes it clear that he doesn't really care that much about Xander one way or the other. Also, when Xander killed Jesse, he tried to reason with Jesse, tried to find the human inside and found out it wasn't there. Xander's view of vampires we can safely say is based on Jesse. His best friend who almost killed him, twice, as a vampire. [Harvest S1] Also, from Xander's pov - Willow is in no shape to be doing a spell and unlikely to succeed. Buffy failed last time in killing Angelus because she was stalling due to the spell. And it put everyone in jeopardy, as Buffy herself tells Xander. Xander has not seen Buffy fight Angelus sucessfully. He believes she's up against some pretty nasty odds. Why weaken her further by telling her that Angel could come back? Xander, who thinks with his gut and emotion, doesn't understand Buffy's rational reasoning. They come at things differently. Xander makes his decision as most of us tend to do, based on what Xander would do if he were Buffy. Not based on what Buffy would do. (Note Selfless - where Xander does with Anya exactly what he may have feared Buffy would do in Becoming.) We all make the mistake of thinking that others should do what we would do in a situation. We look at their actions or reactions based on our own.

Willow's Motivations

Willow was also thinking with her emotions. She'd romanticized the Angel/Buffy romance.
And wanted everything to end well. When confronted with what happened in Selfless - she states, well it all worked out well didn't it? But did it? Willow also tends to be selective in how she remembers events. And from Willow's perspective doing the spell would mean Buffy and Angel ride off into the sunset. Maybe they are together? She states at the end of Becoming. I know it worked. I felt something go through me. She is thrilled. In Dead Mans' Party up to and including Faith Hope and Trick - Willow is bragging about what she did. She is literally begging Buffy to acknowledge it. Much the same way she is in Afterlife and the episodes following it. She wants to be congragulated for what she accomplished. Giles, for the record, both times, shuts her down. He chides her. States she is playing with fire. Opening doors that she may not be able to close. But he's also uncertain whether Willow did the right thing in both cases.

Conclusion?

I don't think the writers answer the question. I think they leave it open-ended. To be debated if you will. It makes sense that the characters did what they did. Actually I can't see them doing anything else. Becoming was rather well plotted in regards to its characters and its characters actions were organic to them. No OOC moments here. But from moral, ethical and tactical stance - were the characters correct in what they did? Were there other options? And what were the consequences? These questions aren't really that different than the ones we ask of own political and military leaders when they invade Iraq or do embargo negotiations with North Korea or the setting up of or demolishing of Guaitanmo Bay. Are we second-guessing actions that we have limited information regarding?
Are the leaders right in how they went about it? It's hard to know. But I think the questions need to be asked all the same - even if there are no satisfactory answers forthcoming.





*[Edited since first posting.]

Comments

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

Hmm. Interesting thoughts.

It's true that casting the spell was dangerous for Willow. But isn't it her right to accept the risk if by doing so, she can save the world, fight evil or help her friends? Buffy does much the same thing every week, and it seems to me that expecting Willow to stay safely back at home and not do anything that might be dangerous is disempowering.


Do you kill the demon or rehabilitate it?

In general, I favour rehabilitation. I think taking the attitude that your enemies are all irredemably evil and should be killed because you can't reason with them is an incredibly dangerous and immoral one. :-)

Angel's soul doesn't compel his actions, the way Spike's chip did. It gives him the choice between good and evil. I'll also note that he can certainly achieve happiness and contentment and keep his soul - just not perfect happiness.


The power though is not Willow's - she got it from the spell, when she opened that door.

I'd say, rather, that by channeling the magic of that spell through her she opened the door to being able to use her own power to cast spells. It's not until late Season 5 that Willow starts to draw on external sources of power again to fuel her magic. As for whether it was a bad thing to do... power is always a double-edged sword. Power lets you oppress the helpless; it also lets you protect the helpless. Without any power at all, you're pretty much doomed to be an eternal victim. I'd argue that it's what you do with your power, not whether you have it at all, that's the important question.


Xander, who thinks with his gut and emotion, doesn't understand Buffy's rational reasoning.

Which is why he's wrong. Worse than that, he's trying to impose his own view of what should happen onto other people, and denying them their own autonomy and right to make their own decisions. Willow's supposed to be his best friend, and yet he deliberately undermines her by trying to trick Buffy into killing Angel before Willow's spell can take effect.

[parcae-lj.livejournal.com]

I could not disagree more with your point about rehabilitation. Angelus is no different from any of the other vampires that Buffy slays on a daily basis without giving them the chance to redeem themselves. In fact, he's worse. Most of the fledglings Buffy slays have just emerged from the ground. They've never done anything wrong. And yet Angelus, who has murdered hundreds of people, gets a second (and a third, and a fourth...) chance while X Random Vampire, whose only crime is being reborn as a predator, is staked without a second thought.

That, actually, is what disturbs me most about the re-ensouling spell. It is monstrously unfair to give Angelus a chance at rehabilitation that is denied to every other vampire.

As for Xander, bear in mind that he is not a bystander. His own life is on the line, and that gives him a say in what should happen. In more everyday terms, Buffy is a police officer who has repeatedly failed to bring a psychopath to justice for personal reasons, and Xander is a member of the public that that police officer is supposed to protect and serve. Not just any member, either, but one who has good reason to believe that the killer is after him personally - maybe a judge who previously sentenced the offender. A hostage situation is in progress (Giles) and the police officer has finally agreed to allow a sniper to try to take the sociopath down. Then the judge hears that the FBI is planning to flood the room with sleeping gas as a back-up measure if the sniper should miss. In the judge's place, I would not tell the police officer about the FBI's back-up plan, because I would have every reason to believe that she might tell the sniper to miss deliberately.

Having said that, I don't agree with Kat (although she makes some good points). This is why.

1. Willow and the spell

Yes, there is every reason to believe that the spell might not work. But there is no reason to believe that the consequences of failure would be dangerous. We are told that it is a difficult spell, but never that it might backfire. Giles and Xander's attitude led me to assume that the primary risk in the event of failure would be to Willow herself. If this is the case, she has the right to risk her own life if she chooses.

2. Angel and the spell

You're right that the spell is a curse. You're right that it is a greater punishment for Angelus than simply dispatching him, and by orders of magnitude. But who cares? Angelus is evil. He deserves all the suffering he can get. To the extent that Angel is responsible for his actions, so does he.

The purpose of the spell is not to rehabilitate Angelus. The purpose of the spell is to provide a final line of defense should Buffy fail to kill him. Imagine if Angelus had killed Buffy, but the soul had kicked in exactly when it did. In that case, it is reasonable to assume that Angel would have killed himself to close the portal to hell. All of the Scoobies are capable of that kind of sacrifice in the right situation.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

It is monstrously unfair to give Angelus a chance at rehabilitation that is denied to every other vampire.

I'd have thought it's more the other way around. Though I assume it would be impractical to reensoul every vampire in the world... But even so, I'd argue that Angel earned his redemption by the things he did, although admittedly most of that was after 'Becoming', not before it.


In the judge's place, I would not tell the police officer about the FBI's back-up plan, because I would have every reason to believe that she might tell the sniper to miss deliberately.

...In which light, you'd need to amend your analogy to say that the 'psychopath' is actually an ex-cop who personally saved the police officer's life on several occasions, and also used to be the second-most successful solver of crimes on the force, and his current state is due to a mental illness he had no control over.

[parcae-lj.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's unfair to stake vampires on sight, but giving them all chips or souls would be profoundly impractical. So give them to all of them or none of them, not the ones you happen to know personally to be good dudes when souled. Plenty of vampires might be good dudes when souled.

As for Angel, he spent a hundred-year period as a dude with superpowers who knew that the world was full of nasty things killing unsuspecting innocents. How would you use that kind of power combined with that kind of knowledge? Angel used it to sit in a ditch feeling sorry for himself for being such a bad person. Until he fell in love with a fifteen-year-old girl, that is, at which point he decided to do a bunch of good stuff to impress her. (He eventually started doing good for its own sake, but I don't see any evidence of it before Season 3 at the earliest.) He did a bunch of good stuff, that is, unless it actually threatened his own useless existence. Witness his being forced to go help Buffy at crosspoint in Prophecy Girl.

So I accept your extension of the analogy, and would further extend it to note that said mental illness is possibly incurable, would be subject to the possibility of recurrence even if successfully cured, and has caused the loss of far more lives than the ex-cop ever saved. Not to mention that the ex-cop was a coward who only joined the force to impress the police officer and was (by his own admission) kind of an ass until he met her, even in his rare lucid intervals. Also, he's a pedophile.

Oh, and we'd also better note that the hostage is the Russian ambassador and he's trying to cause a nuclear holocaust, to incorporate the whole letting-hell-into-earth thing.

Sidenote: Is Angel Angelus? Your analogy seems to assume that he basically is, with the demon destroying his reason rather than his self. Otherwise, if they're different people, it makes no sense to call the sociopath an "ex-cop."

That's a valid interpretation (not to mention the one Angel seems to hold himself), but it's the worst possible one for Angel. If Angelus gets the benefit of Angel's virtues, then Angel is responsible for all of Angelus' crimes. Angelus was around for a hundred years, and he would probably have needed to kill at least once a day just for food - not to mention kills for the joy of killing, which he seems to have done quite a lot. Do the math.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's unfair to stake vampires on sight, but giving them all chips or souls would be profoundly impractical. So give them to all of them or none of them, not the ones you happen to know personally to be good dudes when souled. Plenty of vampires might be good dudes when souled.

There's a really witty fic that was written by a dear friend of mine during the summer of 2002 that reminds me a great deal of this debate. I can't find it though. But have asked. When I do, will post a link.

That's a valid interpretation (not to mention the one Angel seems to hold himself), but it's the worst possible one for Angel. If Angelus gets the benefit of Angel's virtues, then Angel is responsible for all of Angelus' crimes. Angelus was around for a hundred years, and he would probably have needed to kill at least once a day just for food - not to mention kills for the joy of killing, which he seems to have done quite a lot. Do the math.

Angel and Angelus are the same, just as Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are the same or rather two flips of the coin. Think Half and Half in Batman comics - if you are familar with the character. They aren't two different entities, they are two sides of the same one. Otherwise Angel the series makes no sense logically.

Nor does Angel's quest for redemption. Why would you require redemption if you didn't commit the crimes? The writers actually address this in three to four episodes - Amends, Dopplegangland, Never Leave Me, as well as Enemies. They also to a degree explore it with Illyria/Fred.

Angel is responsible for Angelus' crimes - he tries to tell Buffy that more than once. Angel's quest for redemption is an impossible one. It's a noir tale. And Angel is actually more of an anti-hero than hero - always doomed to fail, much like Sisphusys pushing that rock up the eternal hill. We want him to find redemption...but can he? It seems the odds are against it. That's why the tale is interesting. If Angel and Angelus were separate = not the same person, what would be the point?
The curse would be cruel to Angel - because Angel is forced to have the memories of a monster. But from my reading of the text - the soul is not a separate entity, it is conscience of the human, their super-ego if you will, their compass - what makes them human. It's by no means a clear metaphor.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I like the Kat nickname, thank you. ;-)

I think my brain is too tired from work though to enter the debate.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I agree and disagree with you.

I think you are correct about Willow and from what I've seen of the responses, others more or less agree. She did have the right to take the risk and the only risk was to Willow. Also, you are correct, I cannot assume that Willow did not have power previously or wouldn't have gotten it another way. While the spell in Becoming certainly was a power boost, there's no evidence that it was necessarily an evil one. She does do good with the magic.

Also I agree that Power is always double-edged sword. Good points on that. You've managed to convince me that she was right to try the spell and that it was not the power itself that caused problems, but how Willow chose to use it - which rahrihah rightfully points out has a lot more to do with Willow's hangups and flaws than the power itself.

There's a heavy theme in the serious about how we use power and why. Those who believe themselves to be weak, powerless, and ordinary at some point in their lives, often appear to be the ones who misuse it the most. Which I find interesting.

Also agree with your point on Xander - he did impose his on perspective on Buffy. He does this a lot in the series - notably in Entropy and Seeing Red, as well as Selfless. I think one of the reasons Selfless is so brilliant is Xander finally gets to take a few steps in Buffy's shoes and it does change him. He is noticeably silent and accomodating in regards to Spike after that episode. He may complain at times.
But not in quite the same way.

That said, does this mean he is wrong? His reasoning may have been wrong in some respects. But in others...I don't know. mikada made some good points regarding this in gab's post. Also from his perspective, he probably was protecting Buffy. [Bad username or site: parcae lj @ livejournal.com] makes a good point on that one - about the fact that Xander is not a bystander and has good reason to fear and distrust both Angel and Angelus. Buffy may see the two as different people, but Xander does not. He has always been skeptical. Also, you are dealing with a heroine who has stated by both her actions and words that Angel is the most important thing to her. He doesn't trust her in regards to Angel, and to give him credit - I think he is right not to.
Buffy's achillees heel is Angel. Granted she overcomes that by the end of the episode of Becoming, but there is no guarantee that she will.

I agree and disagree on the rehabilitation. No, you should not think your enemies are evil. You are correct there. BUT - in the Buffyverse, there are degrees of evil and some have to be killed - ie, the bald vampires that the First Evil calls up or Angelus in his heyday. I think, as in real life, it depends on the situation. If the enemy is a crazed serial killer...then you know, you might want to kill them. If they are a bank robber high on drugs? Maybe not. Angel with a soul - should be given a chance, just as Spike with a soul/chip should be given a chance. But soulless or without a chip holding back their desire to kill? No. Spike in School Hard and Angelus in Innocence/Passion - were deadly. At any rate - I think we need to be careful not to generalize. Not all demons are necessarily evil, but some are more evil than others.

This is actually addressed in Angel the series, Season 7 and Season 8 Buffy, rather well I think. But there's also a short witty fic, if I can locate it, that addresses it as well.

[gabrielleabelle.livejournal.com]

I am so late on reading stuff and commenting. Meh.

Which is why he's wrong. Worse than that, he's trying to impose his own view of what should happen onto other people, and denying them their own autonomy and right to make their own decisions. Willow's supposed to be his best friend, and yet he deliberately undermines her by trying to trick Buffy into killing Angel before Willow's spell can take effect.

Hey, you eloquently and concisely summed up what I ended up spending many, many comments debating in my Xander post. I'm jealous of you and your wordsmithery.

[stormwreath.livejournal.com]

I'm inspired to eloquence by the thoughts of those who've discussed this before me.
:-)