Why would Giles want to restore Angel's soul?
Daniel Solomon
I had found it puzzling as to why Giles would have been interested
in restoring Angel's soul. I tried to think of the possible
reasons:
1. It was what Jenny wanted. Jenny was working on the restoration
when she was killed, so it would serve as a way to honor her memory.
2. It was what Buffy wanted. 'Nuff said.
3. Restoring Angel would return a useful ally. Angel with a soul
had helped them out on many occasions.
4. Giles knew of the connection between Angel and the ritual with
Acathala, so short of killing him, restoring his soul seemed to be
the only way to prevent Angel from figuring out what to do and
removing the sword.
5. Revenge - just like the curse was originally intended. He wanted
Angel to suffer some more.
So what do you guys think?
--
- Dan Solomon, dsol...@enteract.com
http://www.enteract.com/~dsolomon/
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
No amount of planning will ever replace dumb luck.
Ale...@webtv.net
Giles knew Angel was the perfect set of eyes to have watching Buffys
back. So if there was a good chance, why the hell not.
I take a nap
making the mountain water
pound the rice.
ISSA
Don Sample
In article <356B9899...@enteract.com>, Daniel Solomon
<dsol...@enteract.com> wrote:
>I had found it puzzling as to why Giles would have been interested
>in restoring Angel's soul. I tried to think of the possible
>reasons:
>
>1. It was what Jenny wanted. Jenny was working on the restoration
>when she was killed, so it would serve as a way to honor her memory.
>
>2. It was what Buffy wanted. 'Nuff said.
>
>3. Restoring Angel would return a useful ally. Angel with a soul
>had helped them out on many occasions.
>
>4. Giles knew of the connection between Angel and the ritual with
>Acathala, so short of killing him, restoring his soul seemed to be
>the only way to prevent Angel from figuring out what to do and
>removing the sword.
>
>5. Revenge - just like the curse was originally intended. He wanted
>Angel to suffer some more.
>
>So what do you guys think?
>--
> - Dan Solomon,
I think you missed the big one:
Angel with a soul would stop killing people. Even if you are one of the
people who believes that Angel should die, with or without the soul,
giving him his soul back stops the killing.
Then if you still think he should die, it will probably be lots easier to
kill him. The way he'll be feeling when he realizes what he has spent the
last few months doing, he may even volunteer to hold the stake for you.
--
Don Sample |
dsa...@bix.com | Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
dsa...@synapse.net |
Visit the Buffy Body Count at http://www.synapse.net/~dsample/BBC/
H. McDaniel
Daniel Solomon wrote:
>
> I had found it puzzling as to why Giles would have been interested
> in restoring Angel's soul. I tried to think of the possible
> reasons:
>
I strongly suspect that Kendra's Slayer Handbook would have directed
Buffy not to sleep with Angel (or any other guy) at that particular
point in her life. Giles witheld the Handbook from Buffy because
he assumed she wouldn't abide by the book. But now he feels guilty
because he doesn't really know if that extra bit of information would
have kept Buffy from turning Angel.
Guilty not only for the pain he may have caused Buffy, but (obviously)
for what happened to Jenny and the numerous other people Angelus killed.
So to right his own wrong, Giles would restore Angel.
Now it may not be P.C. to suggest the handbook would of preached
some form of abstinance. But remember that 1.) the handbook is
bound to be very old and therefore not at all concerned with P.C.
notions. And 2.) Kendra's social behavior was not purely incidental
to her *proper* Slayer upbringing.
I'm not saying that if the handbook bit is correct, Giles *should*
blame himself. But he certainly would be a little at fault for
not fully sharing with Buffy.
-McDaniel
HPunster
The Compleat Slayer Handbook:
Rule #1: DON'T HAVE SEX WITH VAMPIRES!
janelaw
Chicken Soup for the Vampire-Slayer's Soul?
HPunster wrote:
>
> I think the Parent's Hand Book says 'Never have sex EVER.'
>
> It looks like there's some bucks to be made here-'Slaying for Dummies',
> 'Watching Made Easy','The Complete Idiot's Guide to Being a Slayerette' and
> even 'So You Say Your Daughter's The Slayer?' Oh, and 'Sunnydale on Three
> Highschool Students a Day'.
Terry McNeal
hpun...@aol.com (HPunster) wrote:
>The Compleat Slayer Handbook:
>Rule #1: DON'T HAVE SEX WITH VAMPIRES!
You would think that some things remain self-evident. ;)
Terry
rogue013
Rule number 2 A bad accent will get you killed
--
Rogue013
Keeper of Buffy's wet T shirt- it's starting to get funky
Keeper of Oz's flea collar
Keeper of Xander's Lemon Butter
Montgomery
Or more importantly:
Hanging around with the Slayerettes will get you killed.
--
(>_________{ Monty }__________<)
(> jmon...@suffolk.lib.ny.us <)
(>----------------------------<)
(> "Who died now?" <)
(> --Dana Scully <)
(>______________________<)
rogue013
But the slayerettes did save Buffy from drownding Xander also saved her
form the Fish teams molesting ways
Cynergy St. Cloud
So, its pretty much the same as the Parent's Handbook then?
Cyn
HPunster wrote:
>
> The Compleat Slayer Handbook:
> Rule #1: DON'T HAVE SEX WITH VAMPIRES!
> >
rogue013
Well it might be if the parent handbook had advanced combat moves and
weapons training. shouldn't there be a Slayer's parents manual Giles has in
the library somewhere collecting dust??
Don Sample
In article <uG4xtphj9GA.224@upnetnews05>, "rogue013"
<rogu...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>Well it might be if the parent handbook had advanced combat moves and
>weapons training. shouldn't there be a Slayer's parents manual Giles has in
>the library somewhere collecting dust??
>
>--
>Rogue013
He made a comment in one of the first season episodes about not having a
manual for being a Watcher, but maybe he meant that he didn't have one on
being Buffy's Watcher (since the standard Slayer Handbook didn't apply to
her.)
HPunster
Damien R. Sullivan
"H. McDaniel" <mcda...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>I'm not saying that if the handbook bit is correct, Giles *should*
>blame himself. But he certainly would be a little at fault for
>not fully sharing with Buffy.
I suspect the Handbook is a pest control manual. "Have perfect technique.
Don't have distracting emotions. Slay, move on, slay, move on..." Great for
controlling idiot wanker pest vampires dumber than the coffins they were
buried in. Not for fighting alpha vampires like Luke and Darla et al. Kendra
looked like she had trouble fighting Angel; Buffy has kicked Angelus' butt
twice, and has Spike frightened of her. "I'll take her out of the country and
you'll never hear from us again... I bloody well hope."
Buffy doesn't need the Handbook. Bad things to happen to Buffy season 3: some
more traditional Watcher tries to take her in hand. Or Whistler. Whistler's
line about being by herself seems highly dangerous: yes, she has to rely on
herself, but friends and family are pretty damn useful!
-xx- Mindstalker X-)
"I'm inspired by the MIR situation, in a back-door sort of way...
It demonstrates that space can be inhabited by a duct-tape culture
(Apollo 13 was a disaster - Mir kludgery is SOP)." -- Clark Brooks
Mike Perkins
janelaw wrote:
> Chicken Soup for the Vampire-Slayer's Soul?
>
> HPunster wrote:
> >
This Old Hellmouth.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Perkins
- mper...@home.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- "It's easier to ask for Forgiveness than it is to ask for Permission"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maureen Goldman
hpun...@aol.com (HPunster) wrote:
> I think the Parent's Hand Book says 'Never have sex EVER.'
Yep. None of us want grandchildren. The gene pool stops here.
None of that kissy stuff.
Dunbarton High School
Oh, I think grandchildren are wanted. Just only if some sort of
immaculate conception can be managed.
Maureen Goldman
> > hpun...@aol.com (HPunster) wrote:
> >
> > > I think the Parent's Hand Book says 'Never have sex EVER.'
> > Maureen Goldman
> > Yep. None of us want grandchildren. The gene pool stops here.
> > None of that kissy stuff.
>Dunbarton High School <dhs.g...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Oh, I think grandchildren are wanted. Just only if some sort of
> immaculate conception can be managed.
No, that sort of thing never turns out well.
HPunster
yeah, really!