Lord Usher's Thoughts -- "The Cautionary Tale of Numero Cinco" (SPOILERS)
Lord Usher
before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
(SPOILERS are below...)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The main reason I had to watch this episode again was because I
originally viewed it with a group of people who didn't all agree that it
was a damn powerful piece of work. It's clear from the responses here
that this is one of the more divisive episodes of the series, and that
division was apparent in my viewing group, as well. When Numero Cinco
began his narration and the story flashed back to five mexican wrestlers
mixing it up in the ring, the viewer on my left exclaimed, "This is
*awesome*!" -- while the viewer on my right cringed in embarrassment.
When the episode was over, the viewer on my right turned to the hardcore
fans among us, mortified. "What happened to this show?!" he asked. To
him "The Cautionary Tale of Numero Cinco" was a clear example of a show
that had lost its way.
Me, I'm more in agreement with the viewer on my left. This episode may
have been a bit rough around the edges, but it was indeed awesome. And
it was far, far from being a show that had forgotten itself.
If nothing else, this was a show that was deeply, fully, and uniquely
ANGEL.
In a season that has all too often seemed like a warmed-over version of
some other work -- e.g., "Life of the Party" had a plot device stolen
from BUFFY's "Something Blue," and "Hellbound" had scary horror tropes
stolen from every ghostly thriller ever made -- it was so refreshing to
see a story that couldn't have been told anywhere else.
The story of Numero Cinco played upon nearly everything that makes ANGEL
what it is. Its multicultural urban setting. Its hard-boiled film-noir
coolness. Its focus on what makes a hero and a man. Even its new HELL-A
LAW setting, and its attendant exploration of corporate alienation.
And it explored our eponymous hero in more depth than any other episode
this season, finally bringing into focus the vague metaphysical angst
that's been plaguing Angel since he dispatched Connor and took over
Wolfram & Hart. You remember when I said that I wished the writers would
reference *specific events* in Angel's past that led him to his current
state of mind, instead of just spinning convenient catch-all references
like "prophcy is all bunk"? Well, this week I actually got my wish: "The
Father Will Kill the Son."
What a great, great scene that was. Not only did it reveal one of the
major sources of Angel's uncertainty, but it then deepened his sense of
detachment when he realized, oh, shoot, I'm the only one who remembers
that. I totally dig the irony -- by depriving his friends of their
memories he's deprived them of the ability to learn from their mistakes
-- and I hope that's an idea the writers will continue to explore. (I
also love how this ties back into one of Numero Cinco's laments about
the futility of heroism: "Is it too much to expect them to remember
their past?" Very subtle, very cool.)
Perhaps most importantly, though, this scene is a sign that maybe the
mindwipe isn't just a convenient way to sweep difficult backstory
problems under the rug (though it certainly is that, too :) ). Here the
writers use it as a jumping-off point for new stories, new problems, and
that gives me a lot more hope that they won't just let the issue drop
for the sake of the much-desired Casual Fan.
Finally, I've noticed some discussion about whether Angel's arc in this
episode undoes his Epiphany, or cheapens his arc because he's now once
again fighting for a "reward." I'll admit, I was *very* worried about
exactly that possibility -- but I think this episode was careful not to
suggest any such thing.
Because, as the parallels between Angel and Numero Cinco made clear,
this wasn't about a reward. Numero Cinco wasn't looking for a reward; he
was looking only for recognition, for validation -- for his brothers to
tell him, yes, you are still a hero. And that's what Angel was looking
for, too -- not for a big, shiny Shanshu, but for something to reassure
him that, hey, despite everything that's changed, you're still the
prophesied champion and you're still doing good.
That's a desire that's still fully in keeping with post-Epiphany Angel,
and a concern that makes perfect sense in light of what he's gone
through over the past few seasons. For the first time in quite a few
episodes, I'm eager to see where Angel's crisis of self-identity will
take him.
--
Lord Usher
"I'm here to kill you, not to judge you."
Linda
"Lord Usher" <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74...
> I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode again
> before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
> found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>
> Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
Thank you. That was perfectly said in every way.
It gives me hope for this season of Angel and makes me look forward to the
remaining episodes where I wasn't before your review.
--
Best Regards,
Linda
I miss Kate Lockley.
DarkMagic
"Lord Usher" <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74...
My spouse and I were not particularly impressed with the episode, but what I
do like is seeing Angel interacting with people outside of the core gang
again. That was what his mission in Los Angeles was all about to begin
with, reaching out, touching others with his own experiences and he
definitely did that in this ep.
>
The other bit I liked was when he told number 5 that living is the hard
part, i.e. throwing yourself on the pyre isn't what being a hero and
redemption are all about.
> And it explored our eponymous hero in more depth than any other episode
> this season, finally bringing into focus the vague metaphysical angst
> that's been plaguing Angel since he dispatched Connor and took over
> Wolfram & Hart. You remember when I said that I wished the writers would
> reference *specific events* in Angel's past that led him to his current
> state of mind, instead of just spinning convenient catch-all references
> like "prophcy is all bunk"? Well, this week I actually got my wish: "The
> Father Will Kill the Son."
>
Interesting, I think, that for the first time we see that Angel is thinking
he intentionally thwarted that prophecy by refusing to murder Connor.
Although, I think it can be reasonably argued that he did, in fact, still
kill his son. Connor is no more.
> What a great, great scene that was. Not only did it reveal one of the
> major sources of Angel's uncertainty, but it then deepened his sense of
> detachment when he realized, oh, shoot, I'm the only one who remembers
> that. I totally dig the irony -- by depriving his friends of their
> memories he's deprived them of the ability to learn from their mistakes
> -- and I hope that's an idea the writers will continue to explore.
Me too, it's no secret that what I absolutely loathed the most about the Key
was how little impact Dawn's existence had on anything or anyone. It's
simply not possible, no matter what crazy fanwank you come up with, to mess
with time, or add an entire human being to the mix of the world and not have
drastic consequences. Now we get to see if Joss Whedon learns from his
mistakes.
I got an early Christmas gift, the new video game "Chaos Bleeds" which is
set in BtVS season 5. There just aren't enough words for me to describe the
bliss I feel playing in Season 5 sans the existence of that stupid Key. I
haven't played along very far into the story, yet, but I get the impression
it's set in an alternate Buffy universe. I'll take Sid the Puppet, and
Ethan Rayne over Dawn anytime.
--
Shannon
"No one wants to put words in J.K. Rowling's mouth, but it's safe to assume
when she hails her reader's creativity, she has in mind something other than
the tales wherein Professor Snape is fellated by the Sorting Hat." Tracy
Mayor, The Boston Globe, 6/25/03
MLGM
> episode undoes his Epiphany, or cheapens his arc because he's now once
> again fighting for a "reward." I'll admit, I was *very* worried about
> exactly that possibility -- but I think this episode was careful not to
> suggest any such thing.
>
working for a reward? Angel's reward was he liked feeling like the
big boss and the big man saving people. That was made clear over &
over again. Angel came back and made a big speech about how he wanted
to work FOR Wes. And that lasted, what? Ten minutes? Cordy kept
trying to remind him Wes was in charge, and Angel kept taking over.
This idea that Angel's Epiphany actually changed his behavior is not
borne out by Angel's behavior. Angel likes feeling the big man. He
likes feeling the hero. Which is why when Gunn told him of all the
good they'd done by signing the papers, Angel was indifferent. Angel
wants people to see he's the hero. He wants the thank yous.
This doesn't make Angel and bad guy. He doesn't lessen the good he
does. But this idea that Angel has ever helped without thought of
reward is just wrong. Angel wants the reward of being thought of, and
treated like a hero. And when he's not, he pouts; much like when the
Aztec demon didn't take his heart.
When did Angel ever do good and not want to see the admiration.
s
Linda
"MLGM" <mlgm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75f34eb.03110...@posting.google.com...
Well, the woman in the teaser of *Conviction* did thank him but he wouldn't
even tell her who he was. She didn't know anything about him until his
employees all showed up in that alley. And that's just off the top of my
head.
--
Best regards,
Linda
Mmmmmm......Angel
himiko
I agree. Angel doesn't actually ask for much, but he did love gruffly
sweeping aside efforts to thank him so that he could stride off into
the un-sunset with the saved person gazing after him in gratitude and
admiration. Spike had his number in that soliliquey he did on the
rooftop early in S1. Of course, Spike is this way now too...more so
than Angel ever was. He isn't really a hero in his own eyes until he
sees it someone else's eyes, preferably someone female. The way he
lit up when Fred called him a hero was only too revealing. This
doesn't make him or Angel bad guys, merely surprisingly and
reassuringly human.
Indeed Spike's on-going role and also that scene with Gunn when it was
so clear that Angel found little personal fulfillment in distant
altruisms even though he recognized that they helped more people in a
single day than he could help personally in a year, tells me that ME
is going into very dark hero territory. Angel may say he knows doing
good should be its own reward, but he can't live by it. And now he's
been placed in a situation where he actually can do the most good
anonymously. No one will ever know; to the contrary, he will probably
be reviled by good people as the CEO of W&H. Only he will know of all
the good he does. He no longer believes in the PTB or the shanshu
prophecy. So he's all set up to actually try to live what he said in
Epiphany. I'm guessing he fails.
And again, that doesn't make him a bad guy or even a non-hero. Even
Buffy, who was the most altruistic in this regard, liked her little
moments. She needed the admiration of the Scoobs as much as she
needed their assistance; she needed someone to know what she did. And
when it went beyond that little group, when Jonathan gave her that
umbrella or even when Dracula told her she was famous among the
undead, she blushed with pleasure like the schoolgirl she actually
was.
I don't think anyone can be a pure hero of the sort Angel described in
his Epiphany. It's an ideal to strive for, but no one will ever reach
it...or if they do, we'll never know. ;)
himiko
SWeick
> I've finally
>found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>
>Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
Solid, yes. Powerful? Not seeing it as much better than IGUYMS
as far as powerful.
It to me was the best work of those I've seen this season, but
that's not great praise either.
I think that's reasonable. While a nice piece using the story to
reflect Angel's own problems, like S1 use to excel at, not seeing it
again as powerful as others.
When Numero Cinco
>began his narration and the story flashed back to five mexican wrestlers
>mixing it up in the ring, the viewer on my left exclaimed, "This is
>*awesome*!" -- while the viewer on my right cringed in embarrassment.
It was neither IMO.
>Me, I'm more in agreement with the viewer on my left. This episode may
>have been a bit rough around the edges, but it was indeed awesome. And
>it was far, far from being a show that had forgotten itself.
No, but those previous ones were more powerful.
>If nothing else, this was a show that was deeply, fully, and uniquely
>ANGEL.
That I would agree with. It worked on that level, verses everything
else done this season and often much of last.
In some ways, the reaction reminds me of Fear Itself. That story got
slightly undercut by the subtext, the smallness of fear represented
by the minuet demon harms the damage that fear does. Here the
subtext gets undercut by the Mexican storyline, that while a perfect
homage to the Mexican wrestler movies does create some issues.
Cause those wrestling movies were less believable than AtS at times.
>And it explored our eponymous hero in more depth than any other episode
>this season, finally bringing into focus the vague metaphysical angst
>that's been plaguing Angel since he dispatched Connor and took over
>Wolfram & Hart.
Praising an episode for what should have been done throughout the
first group of episodes isn't good though. It's lagging storytelling.
>Perhaps most importantly, though, this scene is a sign that maybe the
>mindwipe isn't just a convenient way to sweep difficult backstory
>problems under the rug (though it certainly is that, too :) ). Here the
>writers use it as a jumping-off point for new stories, new problems, and
>that gives me a lot more hope that they won't just let the issue drop
>for the sake of the much-desired Casual Fan.
The fear of this obsessive fan is that they'll screw it up. In some
ways it would be better if they did drop it, cause what's gonna
happen when they find out what Angel did? Pissed? About
what? OK about it? Why? Would anyone's life have
been different? If so, how?
See, having a nice episode happen doesn't stop my fear of where
ME is going now. That they won't execute it well. S4 had great
potential. Boy did it blow up badly.
>Because, as the parallels between Angel and Numero Cinco made clear,
>this wasn't about a reward. Numero Cinco wasn't looking for a reward; he
>was looking only for recognition, for validation -- for his brothers to
>tell him, yes, you are still a hero. And that's what Angel was looking
>for, too -- not for a big, shiny Shanshu, but for something to reassure
>him that, hey, despite everything that's changed, you're still the
>prophesied champion and you're still doing good.
Yeah, but without CC, not seeing how he's gonna get the message
by anyone he'd care to hear from.
For the first time in quite a few
>episodes, I'm eager to see where Angel's crisis of self-identity will
>take him.
He's a vampire with a soul. He should get over it.
Stephen Weick
(Hey, what are you looking down here for?)
Clairel
> before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
> found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>
> Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
> The main reason I had to watch this episode again was because I
--Yes, that's what I've been saying for quite a while now. Some who
are reading this may want to go find the thread "Season 5: Angel's
alienation" where I talk about this in detail.
I totally dig the irony -- by depriving his friends of their
> memories he's deprived them of the ability to learn from their mistakes
> -- and I hope that's an idea the writers will continue to explore.
--A good point. I hadn't been thinking along these lines, but it is
true that Angel's high-handed decision to wipe his friends' memories
has deprived them of opportunities for human growth. It isn't only
Angel who is suffering from his present inability to confide fully in
his friends and be understood by them; it is also they who have had
important pieces of their lives and personalities removed. I really
think Angel committed a crime with this mindwipe, and I hope there'll
be repercussions for him beyond just his inability to confide in his
friends. I'd like to see them get their real memories back someday
and are furious with Angel.
--Here, LU, I have to disagree with you. I don't see any indication
that Angel is just looking for recognition, and not a reward. I see
Angel following Wes's well-intentioned but wrong advice, and what Wes
stressed in his advice was that Angel needs *hope.* Hope is something
that always looks forward to the future. Recognition, and reassurance
that he is a hero and is doing good, is something that occurs in the
present. Wes thinks Angel needs to look *forward* to something that
has yet to happen--something that the Shanshu can give him. And what
might that be? Answer: a normal human life, free of demonic urges and
bloodlust, free of the possibility that Angelus could be unleashed,
free of all the inconveniences that all vampires have to cope with and
free of Angel's particular inconvenience of the gypsy curse and its
perfect happiness clause. Wes thinks Angel needs to have that carrot
dangled in front of him in order for him to keep going on, fighting
the good fight.
The speech Angel made to Numero Cinco, about finding satisfaction in
the work itself--the achievement of saving people's lifes and making
the world a safer place--and not doing it for the sake of a big shiny
reward was essentially the same as Angel's speech in Epiphany. In
both cases, what Angel said was right and true. The difference in
episode 5.6 is that Angel's heart wasn't in it any more. He was
mouthing the words, not feeling the truth of them. In Epiphany, by
contrast, Angel really meant what he said. His sincerity was
palpable.
If Angel had really got his head straightened out by the end of
episode 5.6, it wouldn't have ended with Wes thinking Angel was still
afflicted with malaise--Wes would have been able to see the change in
Angel, and his advice would have gone unspoken, because Wes could have
seen it wasn't needed. As it was, though, Angel *was* still suffering
from a spiritual malaise, and in following Wes's well-intentioned but
incorrect advice Angel is being sidetracked off of the right path for
him to follow.
Show me where Angel clearly wants recognition rather than the future
reward of humanity, and I'll revise my opinion. But I don't think you
really can point to anything solid in the episode that indicates this;
I'm afraid it's wishful thinking on your part. I'm keeping an open
mind for now, but I just don't see where you're getting this from.
Clairel
j
> does. But this idea that Angel has ever helped without thought of
> reward is just wrong. Angel wants the reward of being thought of, and
> treated like a hero. And when he's not, he pouts; much like when the
> Aztec demon didn't take his heart.
>
> When did Angel ever do good and not want to see the admiration.
And for the Angel 'on the couch' discussion .... isn't this about
public approval/recognition?.... the over achiever who needs external
validation?... the thing he never recieved when mortal and that was
even spelt out in an 'I'll show you' moment that resolved nothing?
The recent actions are consistent with this persona
J
Chris Zabel
news:c7902983.03110...@posting.google.com...
> I don't think anyone can be a pure hero of the sort Angel described in
> his Epiphany. It's an ideal to strive for, but no one will ever reach
> it...or if they do, we'll never know. ;)
Batman; Unfortunately his quest is driven by vengeance more than altruism.
Thirsty Viking
Thirsty Viking
> part, i.e. throwing yourself on the pyre isn't what being a hero and
> redemption are all about.
I think you have overstated this...the brothers died heros...
when you die a hero then that is what you are.... When you are a hero
one day and you go to sleep... it is hard to remain a hero the next day.
It is hard to stay a hero when the children don't worship you anymore,
and the women don't love you, andthe men only remember a farce of
the great deeds you did.
> >
> Interesting, I think, that for the first time we see that Angel is
thinking
> he intentionally thwarted that prophecy by refusing to murder Connor.
> Although, I think it can be reasonably argued that he did, in fact, still
> kill his son. Connor is no more.
Actually we had Sah'jahn claiming this profesy was faked so that he
could get wes to betray angel.
And yes in many ways you can claim angel has killed conner.
> > What a great, great scene that was. Not only did it reveal one of the
> > major sources of Angel's uncertainty, but it then deepened his sense of
> > detachment when he realized, oh, shoot, I'm the only one who remembers
> > that. I totally dig the irony -- by depriving his friends of their
> > memories he's deprived them of the ability to learn from their mistakes
> > -- and I hope that's an idea the writers will continue to explore.
>
> Me too, it's no secret that what I absolutely loathed the most about the
Key
> was how little impact Dawn's existence had on anything or anyone. It's
> simply not possible, no matter what crazy fanwank you come up with, to
mess
> with time, or add an entire human being to the mix of the world and not
have
> drastic consequences. Now we get to see if Joss Whedon learns from his
> mistakes.
I disagree here, Obviously she did have an effect going forward.
Buffy suicide/depression post raising etc are all connected with Dawn.
Thirsty Viking
"j" <jos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6bcf75a6.03110...@posting.google.com...
Angels need for Validation explained to us in season 1
From the episode "The Prodigal" season 1 episode 15
----Angelous sitting at table surrounded by bodies of his family----
Darla: "This contest is ended isn't it"
Angel: "now i have won"
Darla: (mockingly) "are you sure?"
Angel: "of course i proved who had the power here"
Darla: (surpressed laughter in voice) "you think"
Angel: "what"
Darla: "Your Victory over him took but moments"
Angel: "yes"
Darla: "but his defeat of you will last a lifetime"
Angel: "what are you talking about, he can't defeat me now nor
can he ever approve of you in this world or any other"
<pause>
"what we once were informs all that we have become
the same love will infect our hearts,
even if they no longer beat
simple death will not change that"
Angel: "is this the work of love"
Darla: "Darling Boy, so young, still so very young"
----------------------------------------------------------
john
Thirsty Viking
> reward of humanity, and I'll revise my opinion. But I don't think you
> really can point to anything solid in the episode that indicates this;
> I'm afraid it's wishful thinking on your part. I'm keeping an open
> mind for now, but I just don't see where you're getting this from.
>
> Clairel
Angels need for Validation explained to us in season 1
From the episode "The Prodigal" season 1 episode 15
----Angelous sitting at table surrounded by bodies of his family----
Darla: "This contest is ended isn't it"
Angel: "now i have won"
Darla: (mockingly) "are you sure?"
Angel: "of course i proved who had the power here"
Darla: (surpressed laughter in voice) "you think"
Angel: "what"
Darla: "Your Victory over him took but moments"
Angel: "yes"
Darla: "but his defeat of you will last a lifetime"
Angel: "what are you talking about, he can't defeat me now nor
can he ever approve of you in this world or any other"
<pause>
"what we once were informs all that we have become
the same love will infect our hearts,
even if they no longer beat
simple death will not change that"
Angel: "is this the work of love"
Darla: "Darling Boy, so young, still so very young"
----------------------------------------------------------
Along the way Angel has lived a pattern consistent with this.
One can argue that in part he was truely happy with buffy because
she was an undeniable champion for good who loved him and
approved of him.
When he was Angelous he lived his life so over the top evil
that he had evil demon groupies.... Refrence the She-Vamp
from the past that he staked in the bar. In other words he
Raised himself to heights of conspiuous evil that he was
recieving the praise adoration and terror of his fellow evil
being. Even his episodes with holtz were high praise for his
evilness... Holtz killed 374 Vampires trying to get Angelous
and Darla.
While not cannon it is easy to see how Conners birth might
have been seen as Validation in the early days.... no other
Vampire has ever sired a child, I must really be doing
something right. He even achieved the probable salvation
of Darla because of her sacrifice for her unborn child.
Angel enjoys being humble. But i think he does measure of
his success in the Eyes of the people he saves.... words on a
piece of paper that save thousands with no feed back.... are
just words on a piece of paper... he knows they are important,
he just doesn't feel the lives he has improved. Can't even see
the demons exiled to a hell dimension.
Probably haven't absolutely proved my point, but i think you'll
agree that the pattern of his charachter doesn't dispute this view.
It is much like the spike is a disembodied mentality with psychic
powers Theory. Everything CaSpike has done fits this pattern
even though they have not had Fred define him as such in Cannon.
Ian
> I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode again
> before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
> found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>
> Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
More often than not, I find myself in agreement with your assessments.
But not this time. While there were some things to like in it, the
episode as a whole just left me cold. Some others have described it
as boring. That pretty much sums up my feelings.
Well, that may be a clue as to why this one didn't work for me. I was
not cringing in embarrassment, but I was shaking my head wondering
what was going on. At best, the Mexican wresting think left me cold.
> When the episode was over, the viewer on my right turned to the hardcore
> fans among us, mortified. "What happened to this show?!" he asked. To
> him "The Cautionary Tale of Numero Cinco" was a clear example of a show
> that had lost its way.
I'm not that viewer either. I would be far more likely to have reached
that conclusion after the rather awful episode 2.
I saw AtS 5.02 as workmanlike. Not bad, but nothing to get excited
about. Maybe it was because the previous two episodes were quite good,
but it seemed to be lacking something.
[snip]
> Perhaps most importantly, though, this scene is a sign that maybe the
> mindwipe isn't just a convenient way to sweep difficult backstory
> problems under the rug (though it certainly is that, too :) ). Here the
> writers use it as a jumping-off point for new stories, new problems, and
> that gives me a lot more hope that they won't just let the issue drop
> for the sake of the much-desired Casual Fan.
I wish I could share your optimism on this one. Maybe you're privy to
some spoiler information which I haven't seen, being unspoiled this
season. However, from my unspoiled POV, I have no faith whatsoever
that the ME writers will be able to handle anything as subtle or
interesting as you've outlined. I've seen no real sign that their
capable of that since BtVS season 3 and, possibly, the Angel / Darla
arc in AtS season 2.
> Finally, I've noticed some discussion about whether Angel's arc in this
> episode undoes his Epiphany, or cheapens his arc because he's now once
> again fighting for a "reward." I'll admit, I was *very* worried about
> exactly that possibility -- but I think this episode was careful not to
> suggest any such thing.
Really? I thought it was wandering vaguely in that direction. It
seemed to me that the whole idea of fighting the good fight without
any promise of reward was undermined somewhat by equating it as
fighting without hope.
> Because, as the parallels between Angel and Numero Cinco made clear,
> this wasn't about a reward. Numero Cinco wasn't looking for a reward; he
> was looking only for recognition, for validation -- for his brothers to
> tell him, yes, you are still a hero. And that's what Angel was looking
> for, too -- not for a big, shiny Shanshu, but for something to reassure
> him that, hey, despite everything that's changed, you're still the
> prophesied champion and you're still doing good.
Exactly. The need for outside validation. Acceptance. Praise. It's
not enough just to do good... he wants to be recognized for doing
good. IMO, he's substituting one reward for another.
That's how it seemed to me, anyway. Not that it was some huge plot
point. I don't think the writers know or care enough about those sorts
of subtleties. If I was to guess, I'd say that Angel's resumed
interest in the prophecies is intended to set up some kind of conflict
with Spike over who is entitled to become human. But that's just a
guess.
Thirsty Viking
"Ian" <igs6...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5aa58763.03111...@posting.google.com...
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74>...
>
> > I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode again
> > before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
> > found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
> >
> > Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
>
> More often than not, I find myself in agreement with your assessments.
> But not this time. While there were some things to like in it, the
> episode as a whole just left me cold. Some others have described it
> as boring. That pretty much sums up my feelings.
>
Opinions do seem to be widly divergent.
Clairel
notice they're still here--so let me trim this down as I meant to--
reld...@usa.net (Clairel) wrote in message news:<1faed770.03110...@posting.google.com>...
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74>...
MLGM
>
> Well, the woman in the teaser of *Conviction* did thank him but he wouldn't
> even tell her who he was. She didn't know anything about him until his
> employees all showed up in that alley. And that's just off the top of my
> head.
Proved my point. If Angel didn't want the admiration and thanks he
would have simply left. Instead he stayed around and started to give
her the big it doesn't matter who I am.
If it didn't matter, why stay and give the speech. He could have left
with nothing, instead he turns around and launches into his speech so
she can stare admiring at him.
DarkMagic
"Thirsty Viking" <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:zJGdnU7qsMl...@comcast.com...
Exactly, it is hard to keep being a hero, it is hard to continue fighting
the good fight. If it's been all but impossible for a mortal man, how much
more difficult is it for one who is immortal? That's why it's the its the
continuing fight that's important, when you're dead you're dead, you aren't
anything anymore. Angel is dead, but he doesn't want to be. Capice?
>
> I disagree here, Obviously she did have an effect going forward.
> Buffy suicide/depression post raising etc are all connected with Dawn.
Buffy didn't committ suicide, but I agree she was depressed. And she would
have been every bit as depressed if her only options were death and the
brutal, untimely sacrifice of any innocent and helpless teenage girl. Dawn
did not need to be her sister to provoke that reaction. And Joyce's hideous
death was more than enough to induce depression on it's own, not even
including Buffy's failed relationship with Riley and the fact that she
realized no one was going to measure up in her heart to Angel, who she had
to sacrifice first, got him back, and still couldn't have to keep.
Thirsty Viking
undead actually.
> >
> > I disagree here, Obviously she did have an effect going forward.
> > Buffy suicide/depression post raising etc are all connected with Dawn.
>
> Buffy didn't committ suicide, but I agree she was depressed.
Buffy Jumped to her death, that it was a sacrifice to close a portal
to a hell dimension doesn't make it not a suicide.
> And she would have been every bit as depressed if her only options
> were death and the brutal, untimely sacrifice of any innocent and
> helpless teenage girl. Dawn did not need to be her sister to provoke
> that reaction.
No but Dawn being her sister deepened the depression when
she came back because it deepened all the responsibilities she
had interfering with her ability to be the slayer, though not fatally
so for buffy.
Dawn could have been an amulet, in which case buffy would
still have fought to the death if she knew what the key was....
and could have used it to close the portal.
> And Joyce's hideous death was more than enough to induce
> depression on it's own, not even including Buffy's failed
> relationship with Riley and the fact that she realized no one
> was going to measure up in her heart to Angel, who she had
> to sacrifice first, got him back, and still couldn't have to keep.
I've always contended there were several things dragging
Buffy into depression. The ongoing every day one was
DAWN.
School skipping DAWN
Vengence wishing DAWN
Time Eating DAWN
Klepto DAWN
Took a long time through season 6 before Dawn started being
enough of a support to begin balance the Drain she was on Buffy.
Possibly she never was.
Lord Usher
news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com:
> "Linda" <lindaDE...@susieword.com> wrote in message
> news:<YOArb.708348> > When did Angel ever do good and not want to see
> the admiration.
>>
>> Well, the woman in the teaser of *Conviction* did thank him but he
>> wouldn't even tell her who he was. She didn't know anything about him
>> until his employees all showed up in that alley. And that's just off
>> the top of my head.
>
> Proved my point. If Angel didn't want the admiration and thanks he
> would have simply left. Instead he stayed around and started to give
> her the big it doesn't matter who I am.
>
> If it didn't matter, why stay and give the speech.
Uh, because she asked him a question, maybe?
And I would hardly characterize *one line* spoken as Angel *walks away* as
a "big" "speech."
DarkMagic
"Thirsty Viking" <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XNmdnTqLIvJ...@comcast.com...
Well, technically yes, undead, but more to the point I think, not living.
> > >
> > > I disagree here, Obviously she did have an effect going forward.
> > > Buffy suicide/depression post raising etc are all connected with
Dawn.
> >
> > Buffy didn't committ suicide, but I agree she was depressed.
>
> Buffy Jumped to her death, that it was a sacrifice to close a portal
> to a hell dimension doesn't make it not a suicide.
>
You would get a lot of argument about that from various fan factions. Buffy
didn't kill herself, but she did deliberately put herself in an life ending
situation to save the world and her sister. Kind of like throwing herself
on top of grenade, or pushing Dawn out of the pathway of an oncoming bus.
She didn't have any viable options. Had there been another way, I think she
would not have chosen death, and therefore was not actually suicidally
depressed.
> > And she would have been every bit as depressed if her only options
> > were death and the brutal, untimely sacrifice of any innocent and
> > helpless teenage girl. Dawn did not need to be her sister to provoke
> > that reaction.
>
> No but Dawn being her sister deepened the depression when
> she came back because it deepened all the responsibilities she
> had interfering with her ability to be the slayer, though not fatally
> so for buffy.
>
Hey, preachin' to the choir on this one. I was all for sending Dawn back to
Monkville, in fact if you do a Google search you'll find a mock letter I
sent in Buffy's name begging the Monk's to take her back and make her into a
bicycle pump. Still, Buffy had plenty of good reasons to be depressed when
she came back, even sans Dawn.
> Dawn could have been an amulet, in which case buffy would
> still have fought to the death if she knew what the key was....
> and could have used it to close the portal.
>
> > And Joyce's hideous death was more than enough to induce
> > depression on it's own, not even including Buffy's failed
> > relationship with Riley and the fact that she realized no one
> > was going to measure up in her heart to Angel, who she had
> > to sacrifice first, got him back, and still couldn't have to keep.
>
> I've always contended there were several things dragging
> Buffy into depression. The ongoing every day one was
> DAWN.
> School skipping DAWN
> Vengence wishing DAWN
> Time Eating DAWN
> Klepto DAWN
>
I don't think so. Dawn was a huge pain in the ass to be sure, a pain in my
ass and I didn't even live with her. What depressed Buffy, I think, was
lack of focus. She'd believed since she became the Slayer that death was
her destiny, and no matter how often she managed to acheive that fate, life
had other plans for her. She just couldn't figure out what they were. Even
at the end of Season Six she didn't know.
What she did realize from losing her mother, and death, and resurrection,
was that life is short, but not as short as she thought it would be, and it
was time to stop living moment to moment and figure herself out. What I
hoped Season Six would be was an exploration of Buffy Summers the person.
She's as good of a Slayer as she'll ever be. Dawn, I guess, was a way of
finding out more about herself as a human being, but I don't think it was
necessary to make her a fake magic sister in order to explore that.
Lord Usher
news:75f34eb.03110...@posting.google.com:
> OK, you keep saying this and I keep not seeing it. When was Angel not
> working for a reward?
Since "Epiphany," pretty much.
> Angel's reward was he liked feeling like the big boss and the big man
> saving people.
He likes feeling that he's done great good? He feels fulfilled by the idea
that he's helping people in a way that no one else can? Why, that selfish
bastard!
This is all absolutely in keeping with the substance of his Epiphany. The
whole point of Angel's revelation was that the *acts themselves* are their
own reward, and that's exactly what you're talking about -- him feeling
rewarded by the individual feats of heroism he performs.
Thirsty Viking
This is debateable, Angel is more alive than someone in a Coma...IMO
He doesn't need to breath... even though he does in order to talk and smell
He is definately aware and responsive to his environment, solving problems,
Holding intelligent conversations.... He also Eats without assistance.
A vampire isn't really dead till he is dusted.... True he is not human.
The Fact is that Angel is not dead as in OVER AND DONE. He has to
get up every day and try to remain a hero just as Number 5 had to. And that
was the sence of being alive that was important.
> > > >
>>>> I disagree here, Obviously she did have an effect going forward.
>>>> Buffy suicide/depression post raising etc are all connected with
>>>> Dawn.
> > >
> > > Buffy didn't committ suicide, but I agree she was depressed.
> >
> > Buffy Jumped to her death, that it was a sacrifice to close a portal
> > to a hell dimension doesn't make it not a suicide.
> >
> You would get a lot of argument about that from various fan factions.
Buffy
> didn't kill herself, but she did deliberately put herself in an life
ending
> situation to save the world and her sister. Kind of like throwing herself
> on top of grenade, or pushing Dawn out of the pathway of an oncoming bus.
> She didn't have any viable options. Had there been another way, I think
she
> would not have chosen death, and therefore was not actually suicidally
> depressed.
State of mind isn't important here, isn't even mentioned in suicide
definitions except for some that include age of consent and mental
competance, both of which buffy possessed in season 5 conclussion.
.... extracting the core
> she did deliberately put herself in an life ending situation
Suicide
n 1: killing yourself [syn: self-destruction, self-annihilation]
2: a person who kills himself intentionally [syn: felo-de-se]
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
Her purpose for taking a Jump off that tower that she knew would
kill her is not important in reguards to it being a suicide. What is
important is that she knew it would be fatal.
> > > And she would have been every bit as depressed if her only options
> > > were death and the brutal, untimely sacrifice of any innocent and
> > > helpless teenage girl. Dawn did not need to be her sister to provoke
> > > that reaction.
> >
> > No but Dawn being her sister deepened the depression when
> > she came back because it deepened all the responsibilities she
> > had interfering with her ability to be the slayer, though not fatally
> > so for buffy.
> >
> Hey, preachin' to the choir on this one. I was all for sending Dawn back
to
> Monkville, in fact if you do a Google search you'll find a mock letter I
> sent in Buffy's name begging the Monk's to take her back and make her into
a
> bicycle pump. Still, Buffy had plenty of good reasons to be depressed
when
> she came back, even sans Dawn.
Not disputing that, as I said she had things in her past to deal with...
But the Presence of Dawn made everything worse for her in the first
half of season 6 IMO.
> > I've always contended there were several things dragging
> > Buffy into depression. The ongoing every day one was
> > DAWN.
> > School skipping DAWN
> > Vengence wishing DAWN
> > Time Eating DAWN
> > Klepto DAWN
> >
> I don't think so. Dawn was a huge pain in the ass to be sure,
Buffy was responsible for her though... Buffy had to look at
all Dawns Problems as Problems that Buffy had to solve.
> a pain in my
> ass and I didn't even live with her. What depressed Buffy, I think, was
> lack of focus.
A not insignicant Part of the lack of focus was all the demands
that Dawn placed on her. Demands that Conflicted with the
Demands of being the Slayer.
Lord Usher
news:5aa58763.03111...@posting.google.com:
>> Because, as the parallels between Angel and Numero Cinco made clear,
>> this wasn't about a reward. Numero Cinco wasn't looking for a reward;
>> he was looking only for recognition, for validation -- for his
>> brothers to tell him, yes, you are still a hero. And that's what
>> Angel was looking for, too -- not for a big, shiny Shanshu, but for
>> something to reassure him that, hey, despite everything that's
>> changed, you're still the prophesied champion and you're still doing
>> good.
>
> Exactly. The need for outside validation. Acceptance. Praise. It's
> not enough just to do good... he wants to be recognized for doing
> good. IMO, he's substituting one reward for another.
But the episode frame it in a very particular way: Angel's not seeking
validation *as such* -- like Numero Cinco, he's looking for affirmation
of his heroism *because he himself has started to doubt it*, not because
he needs to feed his vanity or anything like that.
Angel's still doing good for its own sake and not for a larger reward;
he's just looking for someone to reassure him that the thing he's doing
for its own sake actually *is* good.
(Which is not to say that Angel doesn't like the occasional but of ego-
stoking; he obviously enjoys playing the hero and getting the praise.
But it's be quite a stretch to suggest that that's the reason he does
good; it's simply a sometimes-attractive side benefit.)
Lord Usher
news:20031109221243...@mb-m19.aol.com:
> Lord Usher lord_...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> I've finally
>>found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>>
>>Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
>
> Solid, yes. Powerful? Not seeing it as much better than IGUYMS
> as far as powerful.
Ooh, bad example. IGYUMS kicked my ass -- my favorite episode of
season 1. (Though "Somnambulist" is the best.)
But I did think TCToNS was pretty powerful. Not knock-you-socks-off
powerful, certainly, but moving and thought-provoking nevertheless.
> In some ways, the reaction reminds me of Fear Itself. That story got
> slightly undercut by the subtext, the smallness of fear represented
> by the minuet demon harms the damage that fear does. Here the
> subtext gets undercut by the Mexican storyline, that while a perfect
> homage to the Mexican wrestler movies does create some issues.
>
> Cause those wrestling movies were less believable than AtS at times.
I actually found the luchadores quite believable. Because it *is* a real
thing, these masked warriors who are the home-grown heroes of Hispanic
communities. I think you can feel that authenticity in the
characterizations; you can see why these guys would be admired by the
Mexican-Americans of East L.A. -- because they're not only strong and
powerful and noble, but also uniquely *theirs*.
(Oh, and "Fear Itself" kicked my ass, too...)
>>And it explored our eponymous hero in more depth than any other
>>episode this season, finally bringing into focus the vague
>>metaphysical angst that's been plaguing Angel since he dispatched
>>Connor and took over Wolfram & Hart.
>
> Praising an episode for what should have been done throughout the
> first group of episodes isn't good though.
Nor is penalizing an episode for what other episodes didn't do.
This is the episode what done it; this is the episode what gets the
credit fer it. Simple as that.
>>Perhaps most importantly, though, this scene is a sign that maybe the
>>mindwipe isn't just a convenient way to sweep difficult backstory
>>problems under the rug (though it certainly is that, too :) ). Here
>>the writers use it as a jumping-off point for new stories, new
>>problems, and that gives me a lot more hope that they won't just let
>>the issue drop for the sake of the much-desired Casual Fan.
>
> The fear of this obsessive fan is that they'll screw it up. In some
> ways it would be better if they did drop it, cause what's gonna
> happen when they find out what Angel did? Pissed? About
> what? OK about it? Why? Would anyone's life have
> been different? If so, how?
I don't really understand your objection here. Are you saying, you don't
know what they're gonna do with the situation? Or you don't think
there's anything they can do? Or just that there are lots of
possibilities and they might choose the wrong ones...?
> See, having a nice episode happen doesn't stop my fear of where
> ME is going now. That they won't execute it well. S4 had great
> potential. Boy did it blow up badly.
Quite the contrary, IMHO -- season 4 started out meandering and
befuddling, but by the end had pulled it all together for a tight,
smart, fascinating final arc. Entropy to order. That's the opposite of
blowing up badly. :)
So I have some hope that they can pull off a similar trick this year.
(Though also some fear that maybe the late lamented Timmy Minear was the
guy responsible for last year's late-season turnabout, and I'm holding
out hope for something that won't come...)
>>Because, as the parallels between Angel and Numero Cinco made clear,
>>this wasn't about a reward. Numero Cinco wasn't looking for a reward;
>>he was looking only for recognition, for validation -- for his
>>brothers to tell him, yes, you are still a hero. And that's what Angel
>>was looking for, too -- not for a big, shiny Shanshu, but for
>>something to reassure him that, hey, despite everything that's
>>changed, you're still the prophesied champion and you're still doing
>>good.
>
> Yeah, but without CC, not seeing how he's gonna get the message
> by anyone he'd care to hear from.
Well, that's the fun of it, innit? Thwarting the desires of the hero for
dramatic impact, and all.
(Though it would be nice to see some acknowledgment of the fact that
Cordy often played that important role in Angel's life...)
--
Lord Usher
"You're a living, breathing... well, living, anyway -- *good* guy, who's
still fighting and trying to help people, and that's not betraying her.
That's *honoring* her."
Linda
As LU already answered you on this point, I won't bother.
But I do have another example. I re-watched *Couplet* yesterday. Angel
totally gave all the credit to the Groosalug for saving the day although it
was actually Angel who was the hero. Groo tried to tell Cordy that it
actually was Angel but Angel gave Groo the silent signal to shut up. Cordy
was never told the truth. To this day she thinks that Groo was the hero of
the day.
--
Best Regards,
Linda
Mmmmmm.....Naked...Angel
Lord Usher
news:1faed770.03110...@posting.google.com:
>> I totally dig the irony -- by depriving his friends of their
>> memories he's deprived them of the ability to learn from their
>> mistakes -- and I hope that's an idea the writers will continue to
>> explore.
>
> --A good point. I hadn't been thinking along these lines, but it is
> true that Angel's high-handed decision to wipe his friends' memories
> has deprived them of opportunities for human growth. It isn't only
> Angel who is suffering from his present inability to confide fully in
> his friends and be understood by them; it is also they who have had
> important pieces of their lives and personalities removed. I really
> think Angel committed a crime with this mindwipe, and I hope there'll
> be repercussions for him beyond just his inability to confide in his
> friends. I'd like to see them get their real memories back someday
> and are furious with Angel.
Oh, I'm definitely looking for this thing to blow up in Angel's face
somewhere along the line. I'd love for Wes to pick up on Angel's brain
fart this week, and try to figure out what he meant when he said "The
Father Will Kill the Son."
He's the one character who's been most in need of an arc this season,
and I think this would make a great one: Wes slowly uncovering
everything that Angel took from them -- and in the process rediscovering
all the darkness that he himself is capable of.
> --Here, LU, I have to disagree with you. I don't see any indication
> that Angel is just looking for recognition, and not a reward. I see
> Angel following Wes's well-intentioned but wrong advice, and what Wes
> stressed in his advice was that Angel needs *hope.*
I just watched the scene again to refresh my memory, and I think it's
important to note in what context Wes used the word "hope." He refers
specifically to "hope that the work has meaning," and then specifies
that he means "meaning for you," i.e., Angel.
Now, that doesn't necessarily mean "hope that you will be rewarded some
day." It could just as easily mean "hope that you are someone special
and you're truly doing good.
And, yes, maybe that's an imprecise use of the word "hope," which as you
point out should be future-directed. But the word is *already* being
used imprecisely in the phrase "hope that the work has [*present* tense]
meaning," so there's already a precedent for that in the scene.
And when you get past the question of word choice and weird grammar, the
thing that really convinces me that this isn't about a reward is that
that's not the element that the rest of the episode focused on. Numero
Cinco wasn't looking for some light at the end of the tunnel; he just
wanted his brothers' spirits to visit him once a year, and his people to
remember him. And Angel wasn't concerned that the demon's refusal to
take his heart meant he would never become human; he was afraid it meant
he was no longer a hero.
Since Angel's decision to reembrace the Prophecies of Aberjian formed
the resolution of this episode, I can only assume that it's because it
presented a possible solution to the problem that Angel was actually
facing in this episode -- not that he lacked hope for a reward, but that
he was afraid he wasn't a hero anymore.
Linda
This is not Angel, this was Angelus. It was Angelus' need for validation for
being the most evil. It has nothing to do with Angel now.
Lord Usher
news:mTwrb.696289$Of.1...@news.easynews.com:
>
> "Lord Usher" <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74...
>> I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode
>> again before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've
>> finally found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>>
>> Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
>
> Thank you. That was perfectly said in every way.
>
> It gives me hope for this season of Angel and makes me look forward to
> the remaining episodes where I wasn't before your review.
Well, shoot. (blushes)
You're welcome...
Ian
Ah, I see what you're getting at.
That's a pretty fine distinction, but it's pretty compelling for all
that. I'm not sure that I have sufficient regard for the writers to
really believe that they're capable of that kind of subtlety, but I
stand to be corrected.
Thirsty Viking
It is Liams need, that is the need of both Angelous and Angel.
Angelous took evil Validation
Angel needs good Validation
MLGM
Recognition is a reward. Needing to hear words is a reward.
> > >
> > > Exactly. The need for outside validation. Acceptance. Praise. It's
> > > not enough just to do good... he wants to be recognized for doing
> > > good. IMO, he's substituting one reward for another.
> >
> > But the episode frame it in a very particular way: Angel's not seeking
> > validation *as such* -- like Numero Cinco, he's looking for affirmation
> > of his heroism *because he himself has started to doubt it*, not because
> > he needs to feed his vanity or anything like that.
>
> Ah, I see what you're getting at.
>
> That's a pretty fine distinction, but it's pretty compelling for all
> that. I'm not sure that I have sufficient regard for the writers to
> really believe that they're capable of that kind of subtlety, but I
> stand to be corrected.
I don't. Angel (and for that matter, what we've seen Angelus and
Liam) all want people to look up to them. They want to be the boss
man and big shot. This doesn't make Angel a bad guy; but this idea
that he wants no reward is silly. Angel never helps and leaves. He
helps, stays and makes big speech about how he wants no reward, listen
while the people gush, and then leaves.
Angel doesn't help the helpless with no thought for himself. He does
it for the reward of feeling like a hero. Which I don't have a
problem with, I don't think it makes him a bad guy or less a hero.
The people he saves aren't less saved because Angel likes to hear he's
a hero. Just as the people Spike saves are any less saved because he
does it for love. The idea that Angel is somehow selfless and better
than Spike is just plain silly. They're both in it for a personal
reward.
And so is everyone. Or didn't you ever notice how Mother Theresa just
soaked up the publicity and loved the attention?
MLGM
ego-
> stoking; he obviously enjoys playing the hero and getting the praise.
> But it's be quite a stretch to suggest that that's the reason he does
> good; it's simply a sometimes-attractive side benefit.)
Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't get
the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The Hyperion
fifty years ago. Beige Angel. Rat eating Angel. Angel needs
someone, Whistler, Buffy, Cordy, strangers, Fred, someone telling him
he's a champion, a hero, he's special or he sulks and often stops.
So where is it stretching to say that's the reason he does good?
Angel's a good guy, not a saint. He's in it for a reward. And again,
who isn't?
MLGM
> > But I do have another example. I re-watched *Couplet* yesterday. Angel
> totally gave all the credit to the Groosalug for saving the day although it
> was actually Angel who was the hero. Groo tried to tell Cordy that it
> actually was Angel but Angel gave Groo the silent signal to shut up. Cordy
> was never told the truth. To this day she thinks that Groo was the hero of
> the day.
And for how long did Angel enjoy himself playing the martyr in front
of Wesley and Lorne?
For a long, long time. Cordy didn't know; but Angel made sure someone
knew what he was giving up for Cordy.
MLGM
But why stay, why turn around at all if he didn't want the reward of
her admiration. Just because someone asks a question, doesn't mean
you have to answer it. And Angel has certainly not answered questions
he hasn't wanted to before. Even when people certainly deserved the
answer.
No Angel answered because he likes being thought a hero. And I have
no idea why that bothers you. Angel is no perfect hero. He's vain.
He's also brave and heroic. But no more so than Gunn, or Wes, or
Fred, or Spike. Good guys, doing good things for their own personal
reward.
MLGM
> mlgm...@yahoo.com (MLGM) wrote in
> news:75f34eb.03110...@posting.google.com:
>
> > OK, you keep saying this and I keep not seeing it. When was Angel not
> > working for a reward?
>
> Since "Epiphany," pretty much.
>
> > Angel's reward was he liked feeling like the big boss and the big man
> > saving people.
>
> He likes feeling that he's done great good? He feels fulfilled by the idea
> that he's helping people in a way that no one else can? Why, that selfish
> bastard!
But he's not fufilled by the idea he's helping people in a way that no
else can. For one thing, other can and do help them in the same way.
Angel likes feeling that he's doing good. And even more, he likes
everyone to know he'd doing good. Signing the papers that helped
thousands but that didn't get Angel their grateful thanks didn't
fufill Angel.
He likes being the mysterious, dark clad hero of the night. He has
since his first appearance on BtVS.
Angel is a good guy; but selfless he is not. I've never seen anything
on the show to suggest he is.
Lord Usher
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns942FCA07177...@216.40.28.74>...
>> mlgm...@yahoo.com (MLGM) wrote in
>> news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> > "Linda" <lindaDE...@susieword.com> wrote in message
>> > news:<YOArb.708348> > When did Angel ever do good and not want to
>> > see the admiration.
>> >>
>> >> Well, the woman in the teaser of *Conviction* did thank him but he
>> >> wouldn't even tell her who he was. She didn't know anything about
>> >> him until his employees all showed up in that alley. And that's
>> >> just off the top of my head.
>> >
>> > Proved my point. If Angel didn't want the admiration and thanks he
>> > would have simply left. Instead he stayed around and started to
>> > give her the big it doesn't matter who I am.
>> >
>> > If it didn't matter, why stay and give the speech.
>>
>> Uh, because she asked him a question, maybe?
>>
>> And I would hardly characterize *one line* spoken as Angel *walks
>> away* as a "big" "speech."
>
> But why stay, why turn around at all if he didn't want the reward of
> her admiration.
First of all, he didn't turn around. He just said one line to her as he
was walking off. Not exactly something that took a lot of effort.
Second, you can't think of *any* other reason why Angelmight want to
respond to her question? It *has* to be because he wanted "the reward of
her admiration" (which he wouldn't even experience, because he was
walking away from her)? It could be because, y'know, he didn't want to
be completely rude by ignoring her altogether?
You're *really* reaching here.
Lord Usher
> I don't. Angel (and for that matter, what we've seen Angelus and
> Liam) all want people to look up to them. They want to be the boss
> man and big shot. This doesn't make Angel a bad guy; but this idea
> that he wants no reward is silly. Angel never helps and leaves.
Except when he obviously does. As in the "Conviction" scene that you keep
trying to mischaracterize.
But, anyway, when he does stop for a chat, why do you assume that it's
purely for recognition? Recall that, in the very first episode of the
series, Doyle explained to him that he shouldn't just save people and run
off -- not because it's cool to get a "reward," but because it's important
to *connect with people* lest they become nothing more than ticks on a
balance sheet that Angel doesn't really care about.
Lord Usher
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns942FD4F4311...@216.40.28.74>...
>> igs6...@yahoo.com (Ian) wrote in
>> news:5aa58763.03111...@posting.google.com:
>>
>>> (Which is not to say that Angel doesn't like the occasional but of
>>> ego-stoking; he obviously enjoys playing the hero and getting the
>>> praise. But it's be quite a stretch to suggest that that's the
>>> reason he does good; it's simply a sometimes-attractive side
>>> benefit.)
>
> Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't get
> the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The Hyperion
> fifty years ago. Beige Angel. Rat eating Angel.
Oh, come *on*!
*None* of these had *anything* to do with Angel thinking he deserved
"recognition." They all had to do with Angel despairing of making a
difference, because either humanity was beyond help, or he was, or both.
DarkMagic
"Thirsty Viking" <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8-udncxAWfy...@comcast.com...
> >>>>
> >>> Exactly, it is hard to keep being a hero, it is hard to continue
> >>>fighting the good fight. If it's been all but impossible for a mortal
> >>> man, how much more difficult is it for one who is immortal?
> >>> That's why it's the its the continuing fight that's important, when
> >>>you're dead you're dead, you aren't anything anymore. Angel is
> >>>dead, but he doesn't want to be. Capice?
> > >
> > > undead actually.
> >
> > Well, technically yes, undead, but more to the point I think, not
living.
>
> This is debateable, Angel is more alive than someone in a Coma.
No, he's really not. Someone in a coma hasn't sold their soul to a demon in
return for eternal life. Coma victims breathe, have heart beats,
etc....it's not much of a life, but it is life.
..IMO
> He doesn't need to breath... even though he does in order to talk and
smell
> He is definately aware and responsive to his environment, solving
problems,
> Holding intelligent conversations.... He also Eats without assistance.
>
And none of that is really what living is all about, which is more or less
the whole point of both series. Vampires do meet the criteria for a living
creature, they eat, and they reproduce, but they do it in icky undead
fashion.
> A vampire isn't really dead till he is dusted.... True he is not human.
>
Vampires are dead. Lorne is not human.
> The Fact is that Angel is not dead as in OVER AND DONE. He has to
> get up every day and try to remain a hero just as Number 5 had to. And
that
> was the sence of being alive that was important.
>
He doesn't *have* to do that, he chooses to do that. Which is what living
is about. He's trying to live like a decent human being, when he's not one.
If he tries hard enough, maybe someday he will be one.
>> > >
> > > Buffy Jumped to her death, that it was a sacrifice to close a portal
> > > to a hell dimension doesn't make it not a suicide.
> > >
> > You would get a lot of argument about that from various fan factions.
> Buffy
> > didn't kill herself, but she did deliberately put herself in an life
> ending
> > situation to save the world and her sister. Kind of like throwing
herself
> > on top of grenade, or pushing Dawn out of the pathway of an oncoming
bus.
> > She didn't have any viable options. Had there been another way, I think
> she
> > would not have chosen death, and therefore was not actually suicidally
> > depressed.
>
> State of mind isn't important here, isn't even mentioned in suicide
> definitions except for some that include age of consent and mental
> competance, both of which buffy possessed in season 5 conclussion.
>
I think state of mind is everything.
> .... extracting the core
> > she did deliberately put herself in an life ending situation
>
> Suicide
>
> n 1: killing yourself [syn: self-destruction, self-annihilation]
>
> 2: a person who kills himself intentionally [syn: felo-de-se]
>
>
> Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
That's a very dry and ambiguous definition. Soldiers, firefighters, and
police officers ostensibly put themselves into situations where they are
likely to die in order to save other lives. I would not insult their
bravery by calling them suicides.
I myself would willingly offer my own life in an instant to save my
children, and I am certainly not suicidal. Undoubtedly, Buffy *was*
suicidal when she was brought back, but I still say that although she was
prepared to die to save Dawn, it would not have been her first option.
>
>
>
>
>
>> > I don't think so. Dawn was a huge pain in the ass to be sure,
>
> Buffy was responsible for her though... Buffy had to look at
> all Dawns Problems as Problems that Buffy had to solve.
>
And that's what motivated Buffy to go on living. In "Grave" Buffy decided
she wanted to live in order to show Dawn how great living really could be.
Without having that connection, that tie to life, somebody who needed her,
Buffy Summers, not The Slayer who is replaceable, who knows what Buffy might
have done? Again, though, that role could have been fulfilled without Dawn
necessarily being some magical sister.
> A not insignicant Part of the lack of focus was all the demands
> that Dawn placed on her. Demands that Conflicted with the
> Demands of being the Slayer.
>
There will always be another Slayer. There's only one Buffy Summers.
Linda
Liam never wanted or needed anyone's approval. He did what he wanted and
seemed to deliberately do things of which his father disapproved.
>
> Angelous took evil Validation
True. He wanted Darla's validation.
> Angel needs good Validation
I disagree. He wants to do what is right. He likes validation just as
everyone does, but he doesn't need it.
--
Best regards,
Linda
Angel's purpose will never leave. Not unless we all become angels, or he
human. And even human his purpose is still there. There's not a lack of
stories because you'll never run into the metaphor problems that BtVS has
had. - Stephen Weick
Linda
news:<sRZrb.138177$1v5.1...@news.easynews.com>...
> > > But I do have another example. I re-watched *Couplet* yesterday. Angel
> > totally gave all the credit to the Groosalug for saving the day although
it
> > was actually Angel who was the hero. Groo tried to tell Cordy that it
> > actually was Angel but Angel gave Groo the silent signal to shut up.
Cordy
> > was never told the truth. To this day she thinks that Groo was the hero
of
> > the day.
>
>
> And for how long did Angel enjoy himself playing the martyr in front
> of Wesley and Lorne?
What?
How did Wesley or Lorne know about this? The only people who knew were Gunn,
Fred, Groo and Angel. Gunn and Fred made it very clear that they weren't
about to tell Wesley. They didn't want to call him - remember? They may have
told him the same story that Angel told Cordy.
>
> For a long, long time. Cordy didn't know; but Angel made sure someone
> knew what he was giving up for Cordy.
Huh?
Explain this.
himiko
Actually, he does sometimes ignore people completely and is never what
you'd call polite on these occasions.
> You're *really* reaching here.
Not at all. No one's saying this is the ONLY reason Angel does what
he does. Just that this is what makes it all worthwhile to him,
personally. This is what gives him the little boost that keeps him
going.
It may not even be the gratitude and admiration, although other
behaviors of his suggest this is important to him. He may just be
after that great "I did good" feeling. It doesn't matter in this
context. Whatever it is, there's something there. He is not totally
selfless. No one is.
If he were totally selfless, he'd get even more of a rush out of
building foster homes for children whose parents were killed by
vampires or stopping the dumping of raw demon sewage into the bay.
These acts save and improve the lives of many, many more people than
his nightly prowling. But this doesn't give Angel a boost. There's
something in it for him in the physical act of saving individual
people that isn't there in the act of signing a piece of paper. Angel
still knows that signing is a good thing, and he still does it, but
without that boost from whatever it is that he gets from fangs-on
saveage, he's getting more and more disconnected and depressed.
This is what happened to Numero Cinco too. His life with his brothers
wasn't the only reason he did what he did either, but it was his
personal boost. And after he lost that boost, he tried to carry on.
He failed. That's not inevitable, but it is very likely.
Angel should heed this cautionary tale. By cutting him off from his
boost, W&H is starting to win.
himiko
Wei-Li Sun
> (SPOILERS are below...)
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
<snip>
> Finally, I've noticed some discussion about whether Angel's arc in this
> episode undoes his Epiphany, or cheapens his arc because he's now once
> again fighting for a "reward." I'll admit, I was *very* worried about
> exactly that possibility -- but I think this episode was careful not to
> suggest any such thing.
Angel: "You made a difference in the lives you saved, and you did it
because ... it was the right thing to do. Nobody asks us to go out
and fight, put our lives on the line, we do it because we can, 'cause
we know how. We do it whether people remember us or not, in spite of
the fact that there's no shiny reward at the end of the day ... other
than the work itself."
Angel made a very touching speech, but his delivery made me question
whether he believed in what he said.
Wei-Li
Randy Money
And I think you were supposed to question his sincerity.
Randy M.
Linda
"Randy Money" <rbm...@spamblocklibrary.syr.edu> wrote in message
news:3FB145EA...@spamblocklibrary.syr.edu...
As I said in my 5 star poll review, it's almost as if he was talking to
himself (of course, in the end he was talking to himself as #5 had left). As
though he himself needed the pep talk. To remind himself of just why he
keeps going and doing his hero schickt. Angel is questioning himself. DB
played it very well.
--
Best Regards,
Linda
I miss Kate Lockley.
Thirsty Viking
>
> I disagree. He wants to do what is right. He likes validation just as
> everyone does, but he doesn't need it.
Seems to be suffering by doing the anonymous good
he needs the feedback. The statistics don't cut it for him.
Thirsty Viking
Doesn't have anything to do with thinking. Has to do with reality...
The gratitude and recognition that angel recieves is like motor oil
that keeps the engine from siezing up. Engine doesn't Think about
needing motor oil, but it does. An engine will run without motoroil,
but not for very long.
Angel Cut off Runs down. Just beating bad guys isn't enough.
Thirsty Viking
>
> "MLGM" <mlgm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com...
> > "Linda" <lindaDE...@susieword.com> wrote in message
> news:<sRZrb.138177$1v5.1...@news.easynews.com>...
> > > > But I do have another example. I re-watched *Couplet* yesterday.
Angel
> > > totally gave all the credit to the Groosalug for saving the day
although
> it
> > > was actually Angel who was the hero. Groo tried to tell Cordy that it
> > > actually was Angel but Angel gave Groo the silent signal to shut up.
> Cordy
> > > was never told the truth. To this day she thinks that Groo was the
hero
> of
> > > the day.
> >
> >
> > And for how long did Angel enjoy himself playing the martyr in front
> > of Wesley and Lorne?
>
> What?
>
> How did Wesley or Lorne know about this?
Lorne knew all about Angel throwing in the towel on cordy.
He might not have known about angel letting Groo get credit.
Wes was a little distracted with kidnapping Conner and
Losing Fred at the time.
Randy Money
Agreed on both points.
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Linda
>
> I miss Kate Lockley.
And Cordy, and Lilah, and all the strong female characters that ME used
to show regularly.
Randy M.
Thirsty Viking
news:<Xns942FCC450D6...@216.40.28.74>...
> > mlgm...@yahoo.com (MLGM) wrote in
> > news:75f34eb.03110...@posting.google.com:
> >
> > > OK, you keep saying this and I keep not seeing it. When was Angel not
> > > working for a reward?
> >
> > Since "Epiphany," pretty much.
> >
> > > Angel's reward was he liked feeling like the big boss and the big man
> > > saving people.
> >
> > He likes feeling that he's done great good? He feels fulfilled by the
idea
> > that he's helping people in a way that no one else can? Why, that
selfish
> > bastard!
>
> But he's not fufilled by the idea he's helping people in a way that no
> else can. For one thing, other can and do help them in the same way.
> Angel likes feeling that he's doing good. And even more, he likes
> everyone to know he'd doing good. Signing the papers that helped
> thousands but that didn't get Angel their grateful thanks didn't
> fufill Angel.
Even if the thanks isn't the "Reward" i think it might be the faces...
Angel Probably remembers EVERY FACE of angelous Victims.
Angel signs a piece of paper svaing 50 lives a year... he has no faces.
Angel stakes a Vamp about to feed on a woman... He has a Face of
a person he has saved... A face with gratitude in it's eyes instead
of terror. An image of that person walking away instead of an image
of the corpse.
Just a Thought.
Linda
>
> "Linda" <lindaDE...@susieword.com> wrote in message
> news:uI8sb.813282$Of.1...@news.easynews.com...
> >
> > "MLGM" <mlgm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com...
> > > "Linda" <lindaDE...@susieword.com> wrote in message
> > news:<sRZrb.138177$1v5.1...@news.easynews.com>...
> > > > > But I do have another example. I re-watched *Couplet* yesterday.
> Angel
> > > > totally gave all the credit to the Groosalug for saving the day
> although
> > it
> > > > was actually Angel who was the hero. Groo tried to tell Cordy that
it
> > > > actually was Angel but Angel gave Groo the silent signal to shut up.
> > Cordy
> > > > was never told the truth. To this day she thinks that Groo was the
> hero
> > of
> > > > the day.
> > >
> > >
> > > And for how long did Angel enjoy himself playing the martyr in front
> > > of Wesley and Lorne?
> >
> > What?
> >
> > How did Wesley or Lorne know about this?
>
> Lorne knew all about Angel throwing in the towel on cordy.
Which is not what we were talking about. We were talking about the times
that Angel gave credit to other people for something heroic that he did. No
wonder I am confused. MLGM totally changed the subject.
> He might not have known about angel letting Groo get credit.
>
> Wes was a little distracted with kidnapping Conner and
> Losing Fred at the time.
Exactly.
Clairel
> reld...@usa.net (Clairel) wrote in
> news:1faed770.03110...@posting.google.com:
> > --Here, LU, I have to disagree with you. I don't see any indication
> > that Angel is just looking for recognition, and not a reward. I see
> > Angel following Wes's well-intentioned but wrong advice, and what Wes
> > stressed in his advice was that Angel needs *hope.*
>
> I just watched the scene again to refresh my memory, and I think it's
> important to note in what context Wes used the word "hope." He refers
> specifically to "hope that the work has meaning," and then specifies
> that he means "meaning for you," i.e., Angel.
> Now, that doesn't necessarily mean "hope that you will be rewarded some
> day." It could just as easily mean "hope that you are someone special
> and you're truly doing good.
> And, yes, maybe that's an imprecise use of the word "hope," which as you
> point out should be future-directed. But the word is *already* being
> used imprecisely in the phrase "hope that the work has [*present* tense]
> meaning," so there's already a precedent for that in the scene.
> And when you get past the question of word choice and weird grammar, the
> thing that really convinces me that this isn't about a reward is that
> that's not the element that the rest of the episode focused on. Numero
> Cinco wasn't looking for some light at the end of the tunnel; he just
> wanted his brothers' spirits to visit him once a year, and his people to
> remember him. And Angel wasn't concerned that the demon's refusal to
> take his heart meant he would never become human; he was afraid it meant
> he was no longer a hero.
> Since Angel's decision to reembrace the Prophecies of Aberjian formed
> the resolution of this episode, I can only assume that it's because it
> presented a possible solution to the problem that Angel was actually
> facing in this episode -- not that he lacked hope for a reward, but that
> he was afraid he wasn't a hero anymore.
--Okay, I see what you're saying now. It's true, Wes did say "hope
that the work has meaning," not "hope that you'll get a reward" or
something of that sort. So if Angel fulfills the prophecy and gets
his reward--rehumanization--that's something to be desired *just
because* it ratifies his status as hero and shows that the work has
meaning?
The trouble is, I still don't see why Angel can't see the meaning his
work has just from the happy, grateful faces of people whose lives he
has saved, or whom he has helped in other ways. Take Nina, for
example. Without Angel's intervention, she would have become a
werewolf and killed her niece and a lot of other people. She wouldn't
have understood what was happening to her, and she wouldn't have known
what to do about it. Thanks to Angel, she can safely spend the three
nights of the full moon each month under lock and key, and she can
avoid ever killing anybody. She can have a happy and fairly normal
life. And if Angel can't "connect" with Nina (and other people he has
helped) and realize the worth of what he has accomplished with her
(and the others), then I think he still has a problem, and reading the
Shanshu prophecy isn't going to solve the problem. Angel has to place
a value on people surviving and living happy lives. *That's* the
meaning of his work. And as long as he is helping people survive and
live happy lives, he's accomplishing something worthwhile; he *is* a
hero. But if he can't see that directly--if he can only see it in
mirrored in the Shanshu prophecy--then his head is still messed up.
It's like college students who only care about the grades on their
transcript, and not about the knowledge they've gained through
studying. Me, I always felt that high grades were just a natural
outgrowth of learning, and that if I did a thorough, earnest job of
learning then that would be reflected in the grades I got. And that's
how it always worked out for me: I concentrated on the learning, and
the grades took care of themselves. I can't help but think that
Angel's priorities are still screwed up, and that his renewed interest
in the Shanshu prophecy is going to divert him onto a disastrous
sidetrack.
I don't usually put any stock in anything the TWOP recappers say, but
for once they said something I agree with. I quote (from
www.televisionwithoutpity.com):
'Once Gunn is gone, Wesley says that he doesn't think Gunn was right
about Angel's shriveled-up heart. He thinks Angel's problem is the
job. He says, "I think it's because you've lost hope that the work has
meaning." Angel unconvincingly says that saving lives has plenty of
meaning, but Wesley says it's lost meaning for Angel. Wesley brings up
the Shanshu prophecy, which is where I get lost. Being rewarded for
your actions doesn't actually give the actions any greater meaning.
Assuming that the Shanshu prophecy is a reward at all -- which is
unlikely, given how prophecies go. Plus, wouldn't it be funny if it
turns out to be a punishment? I could understand this better if Wesley
said that Angel seems to have lost hope, which he has. I'm not sure
the Shanshu prophecy is the best thing for him to pin his hopes on,
but on the other hand, I'm having trouble thinking of any better
ideas. Sometimes when you're in a bad place, you grab anything you can
find.'
I really do think Angel is in a bad place and is grabbing on to
whatever is at hand--which, thanks to Wesley, happens to be the
Shanshu prophecy. (As I said before, I think Wesley is
well-intentioned but wrong here.) Going for
ratification-of-heroic-status through the fulfillment of the prophecy,
rather than just looking at the happy, grateful people, is a subtle
form of corruption, it seems to me--like the moral corruption of
college students who don't care about learning for its own sake but
just want to be able to display a transcript full of high grades.
What's sad (but full of dramatic potential) is that Spike now seems to
have gotten infected by the same subtle corruption. In talking to
Fred about what he did in the Sunnydale Hellmouth, Spike was genuinely
modest; he didn't think there was anything heroic about the sacrifice
he made. Now I happen to think it's the most brave, heroic, moving
thing I've ever seen, and I don't believe there's anything wrong with
Spike getting a glimpse of that viewpoint and taking some pride in
what he did; I don't think the modesty has to be carried too far. I
thought when Buffy called him a Champion in "Chosen," the astonished
look on his face was really sweet and touching; ditto when Fred talked
about how Spike had saved his life and he got the same look on his
face, a surprised "Aw, shucks!" kind of look. If that's all the
farther it went, that'd be fine. Spike (and Angel too for that
matter) *should* have a healthy self-esteem. But in this same
episode, we saw it go farther than that; we saw Spike start thinking
about the Shanshu prophecy in relation to himself.
And if the idea that only one vampire with a soul can win the Shanshu
reward is going to lead to a rivalry in heroism that is really just
about one-up-manship rather than about helping people in need for
those people's sake, then all the heroic efforts are going to be just
as tainted as, say, the academic efforts of a student who spends half
his time sabotaging other students' work because he knows the
professor is only going to award one A and he wants to make sure it'll
be his (unrealistic situation, but I hope you see the point). If the
seeds that have been planted in episode 5.6 bear fruit, what we'll see
is a situation in which Angel and Spike both are so caught up in their
rivalry that they lose sight of what heroic striving is really
supposed to be *for*--namely, other people's benefit. They'll both
have been diverted from that through preoccupation with being the One
And Only Vampire With A Soul who can achieve the Shanshu. Much
suffering and loss may occur before they start seeing and thinking
clearly again: they'll have some bitter lessons to learn.
I'm not bewailing any of this, because I think that dramatically it
could be great--interesting, exciting, and meaningful. But it does
necessarily involve Angel being wrong, Angel being mixed up in his
priorities and values.
Wanting validation of heroic status through the Shanshu reward isn't
as blatantly wrong as just working to enjoy the Shanshu reward itself
would be. As I said, it's a subtle corruption. But it is still
corruption. So that's where I differ from the way you see things, LU:
I still think Angel is off the rails, and Spike is headed the same
way.
Clairel
ilmaestro
I think this is the problem though: with the exception of (as you
mentioned) Nina, and one or two others, he hasn't been getting to see
peoples faces during this season; when Gunn details how much good
Angel's paper-signing exploits have been doing, it is good that has
been done for people that Angel has never had any contact with, people
whose newly improved situation Angel is not actually witnessing. How
could he really be expected to accept that signing paper is as helpful
to the overall good as actually being out there and fighting demons
etc.? For someone like Angel, who has lived and fought for so long,
who was brought up in much different times to now, it must be galling
to think that his new role relegates him to that of 'paper-signer
against evil'. It isn't wrong for him to think this, but natural. To
use your student analogy, it's like if all of a sudden the questions
on the SATs were changed to 'what is your name' and 'where do you
live' after you had spent a long time studying for them. The thought
of 'why have I bothered?/why should I bother any more?' is inevitable.
--
ilmaestro
"No you don't. But thanks for saying it."
George W. Harris
:I think this is the problem though: with the exception of (as you
:mentioned) Nina, and one or two others, he hasn't been getting to see
:peoples faces during this season; when Gunn details how much good
:Angel's paper-signing exploits have been doing, it is good that has
:been done for people that Angel has never had any contact with, people
:whose newly improved situation Angel is not actually witnessing. How
:could he really be expected to accept that signing paper is as helpful
:to the overall good as actually being out there and fighting demons
:etc.? For someone like Angel, who has lived and fought for so long,
:who was brought up in much different times to now, it must be galling
:to think that his new role relegates him to that of 'paper-signer
:against evil'. It isn't wrong for him to think this, but natural. To
:use your student analogy, it's like if all of a sudden the questions
:on the SATs were changed to 'what is your name' and 'where do you
:live' after you had spent a long time studying for them. The thought
:of 'why have I bothered?/why should I bother any more?' is inevitable.
And this problem is brought to the forefront of
Angel's mind by Spike's derisive comments about the
new methods: siccing the IRS on people and such.
--
Want to help fund terrorism? Drive an SUV.
George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.
Thirsty Viking
"Clairel" <reld...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:1faed770.03111...@posting.google.com...
But that's just it, angel isn't seeing many faces
> Take Nina, for example.
> Without Angel's intervention, she would have become a
> werewolf and killed her niece and a lot of other people.
But Nina is also someone Angel FAILED to save... mixed blessing.
> Angel has to place a value on people surviving and living happy lives.
He does, but he has to see them for them to be real to him,
HE SAW all the people that Angelous Devoured and Tortured.
> *That's* the meaning of his work. And as long as he is helping people
survive and
> live happy lives, he's accomplishing something worthwhile; he *is* a
> hero. But if he can't see that directly--if he can only see it in
> mirrored in the Shanshu prophecy--then his head is still messed up.
He is obviously not seeing it when he signs papers... IMO he
literally needs to SEE the faces on a frequent and ongoing basis.
IMO Wes is trying to give angel a second support line for when
his helping is more anonymous.
> Wanting validation of heroic status through the Shanshu reward isn't
> as blatantly wrong as just working to enjoy the Shanshu reward itself
> would be. As I said, it's a subtle corruption. But it is still
> corruption. So that's where I differ from the way you see things, LU:
> I still think Angel is off the rails, and Spike is headed the same
> way.
I see some of the same problems, will be interesting to watch it play
out. Would also be nice to get a little more detail about the shonshu
prophesy, there was far more on that page than we have heard.
john
ilmaestro
<gha...@mundsprung.com> proclaimed:
Indeed. Hopefully this, along with some of the other stuff in TCToNC
will actually go somewhere, as I believe it has genuine potential, but
ME have got work to do to buy back my trust after they screwed up
Cordy so bad.
A.E. Jabbour
EXACTLY. Thank you.
====================================================================
From "City of":
DOYLE
When was the last time you drank blood?
ANGEL
Buffy.
DOYLE
Left you with a bit of a craving, didn't it? Let me tell you
something, pal: that craving's gonna grow and one day soon
one of those helpless victims that you don't really care about
is going to look way too appetizing to turn down. And you'll
figure, 'Hey! What's one against all that I've saved? Might as
well eat them. I'm still ahead by the numbers.' You know,
I'm parched from all this yakking, man. Let's go treat me
to a Billy D.
DOYLE (cont'd)
It's not all about fighting and gadgets and such. It's
about reaching out to people, showing them that there's
love and hope still left in this world.
HOMELESS OLD LADY
Spare change?
DOYLE
Get a job you lazy sow.
You know, it's about letting 'em into your heart.
It's not just saving lives, it's saving souls. Hey,
possibly your own in the process.
====================================================================
I have absolutely no idea where this idea that Angel is
desperate to be admired and worshipped comes from. I can't
think of any evidence for that from the show. None.
If anything, he didn't take Doyle's words to heart enough.
--
AE Jabbour
"I mean, I may have ripped off Vertigo, The Shining, James Elroy,
James M. Cain, Barton Fink, Rebel Without a Cause, Vertigo,
Psycho, Kiss Me Deadly, Double Indemnity and The Hudsucker Proxy
- but I'm certainly no plagiarist!"
Tim Minear, alt.tv.angel, 10.05.2000
A.E. Jabbour
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Xns942FD4F4311...@216.40.28.74>...
>> igs6...@yahoo.com (Ian) wrote in
>> news:5aa58763.03111...@posting.google.com:
>>
>>> (Which is not to say that Angel doesn't like the occasional but of
> ego-
>> stoking; he obviously enjoys playing the hero and getting the praise.
>> But it's be quite a stretch to suggest that that's the reason he does
>> good; it's simply a sometimes-attractive side benefit.)
>
> Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't get
> the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The Hyperion
> someone, Whistler, Buffy, Cordy, strangers, Fred, someone telling him
> he's a champion, a hero, he's special or he sulks and often stops.
>
> So where is it stretching to say that's the reason he does good?
> Angel's a good guy, not a saint. He's in it for a reward. And again,
> who isn't?
Wow. You think that he left the Hyperion to the demon because his
ego was hurt? I think it had far more to do with the fact that they
hung him, left him for dead, and had almost completely come under
the influence of the demon.
As for your other "examples," they don't make any sense. Let's
take just one of them, and show how wrong you are.
Let's take the example of how Angel moved from living in the
alley, munching rats to the Angel we meet in the beginning of
S1 of BtVS. You would argue that he "un-quit" because someone
told him that he's special, that he's a champion, or a hero.
Hmm.
Whistler, in between insults ("The look says crazy homeless guy,"
or "God, you are disgusting") tells Angel that he has a choice:
"I mean that you can become an even more useless rodent than
you already are, or can become someone. A person. Someone
to be counted."
Whistler sends him to see Buffy called. Angel watches from
a distance, and for some reason returns motivated:
ANGEL
I wanna help her. I want ... I wanna become someone.
WHISTLER
God, jeez, look at you. She must be prettier than the
last Slayer. This isn't gonna be easy. The more you live
in this world, the more you see how apart from it you really
are. And this is dangerous work. Right now you couldn't
go three rounds with a fruit fly!
Ok, so Angel has gone from "crazy homeless guy" eating rats,
to wanting to become someone. Why? Because Whistler told him
what a great champion he is, and how he can help rid the world
of Evil, all the while being worshipped and fawned over by
the adoring masses of young damsels-in-distress he saves?
Hardly.
He saw Buffy. He was moved by her, by what her life might
be like. And he was moved by her beauty, obviously. He
probably sensed that there was something special about her.
Oh, and Whistler told him that he could actually be a person,
instead of "an even more useless rodent" than he already was.
So how does this transformation, this becoming, depend on
Angel's desire to be the Hero, and to have fawning damsels
looking upon him in awe and thankfulness?
If you even see Angel at the beginning of BtVS, you would
have an idea of how ludicrous that idea is. And the same
goes for Angel in S1 of his own series.
There is no evidence for the Angel you are describing.
Thirsty Viking
> desperate to be admired and worshipped comes from. I can't
> think of any evidence for that from the show. None.
You have overstated this. He doesn't need a Cult following.
he needs to rescue real life people from iminent death on an
ongoing basis to prove to himself that he is a good guy.
When he rescues them he recieves instant gratification in the
form of the look in their eye. the Thanks in thier Voice.
When he doesn't get these things he is prone to feeling
depressed (yes other reasons as well, it is a complex cycle).
1952 Hyperion Angel is a non helping guy, the gratitude
he recieved from Judy... (Because he got mad at the other
guy trying to invade his room, not because he wanted to
help judy) started him down the path of fighting the Thessalac
demon for reasons even he didn't understand. When her
grattitude dried up in her fear, and she sent the mob after
him... He walked out leaving them all to the demon.
> If anything, he didn't take Doyle's words to heart enough.
If you'll reread the threads the support for this has been
covered in detail. As for Doyles words... these actions of
making connections magnify the reinforcement he gets for
saving people in person from iminent danger. Signing a
name on a contract to help dozens of Faceless folk just doesn't
provide the feedback for angel that saving a damsel from
a hungry Vampire does.
If you need spoken words by a charachter, then Refrence
Darla Talking to Angelous after Angelous kills the family
of liam. This has been quoted in several messages.
That covers the root need of liam that is part of both Angel
and Angelous.
Liams father never aproved of him... Liam rebeled and
acted the part of a total womanizing drunkard to get back
at his father. Also attacked (verbally) his father for
unspecified Corruption, one asumes (I do) of a monetary
nature. When Angeleous was sired, he killed the village,
the whole family to punish the father, and then killed his
father. (well at least he had been attacking the village
before he took out his family... all the garlic that had
been hung). We know that Angelous planned to kill
the entire village, and i think that he may have been
credited with success. It is Angels MO to leave dad
for Last or nearly last (though that is interpretation)
Thirsty Viking
"A.E. Jabbour" <aej17D...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:botvrr$1il5fi$1...@ID-137314.news.uni-berlin.de...
> MLGM <mlgm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns942FD4F4311...@216.40.28.74>...
> >> igs6...@yahoo.com (Ian) wrote in
> >> news:5aa58763.03111...@posting.google.com:
> >>
> >>> (Which is not to say that Angel doesn't like the occasional but of
> > ego-
> >> stoking; he obviously enjoys playing the hero and getting the praise.
> >> But it's be quite a stretch to suggest that that's the reason he does
> >> good; it's simply a sometimes-attractive side benefit.)
> >
> > Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't get
> > the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The Hyperion
> > fifty years ago. Beige Angel. Rat eating Angel. Angel needs
> > someone, Whistler, Buffy, Cordy, strangers, Fred, someone telling him
> > he's a champion, a hero, he's special or he sulks and often stops.
> >
> > So where is it stretching to say that's the reason he does good?
> > Angel's a good guy, not a saint. He's in it for a reward. And again,
> > who isn't?
>
> Wow. You think that he left the Hyperion to the demon because his
> ego was hurt? I think it had far more to do with the fact that they
> hung him, left him for dead, and had almost completely come under
> the influence of the demon.
Yep nothing to hurt your ego like the woman your trying sending
a lynchmob to Hang you.
> As for your other "examples," they don't make any sense. Let's
> take just one of them, and show how wrong you are.
>
> Let's take the example of how Angel moved from living in the
> alley, munching rats to the Angel we meet in the beginning of
> S1 of BtVS. You would argue that he "un-quit" because someone
> told him that he's special, that he's a champion, or a hero.
>
> Hmm.
>
> Whistler, in between insults ("The look says crazy homeless guy,"
> or "God, you are disgusting") tells Angel that he has a choice:
>
> "I mean that you can become an even more useless rodent than
This would imply that he hadent been saving people, also that
his self esteem was kinda low if he didn't contradict it.
> you already are, or can become someone. A person. Someone
> to be counted."
>
> Whistler sends him to see Buffy called. Angel watches from
> a distance, and for some reason returns motivated:
>
> ANGEL
> I wanna help her. I want ... I wanna become someone.
His (2nd?) Damsel.
> WHISTLER
> God, jeez, look at you. She must be prettier than the
> last Slayer. This isn't gonna be easy. The more you live
> in this world, the more you see how apart from it you really
> are. And this is dangerous work. Right now you couldn't
> go three rounds with a fruit fly!
>
> Ok, so Angel has gone from "crazy homeless guy" eating rats,
> to wanting to become someone. Why? Because Whistler told him
> what a great champion he is, and how he can help rid the world
> of Evil, all the while being worshipped and fawned over by
> the adoring masses of young damsels-in-distress he saves?
>
> Hardly.
>
> He saw Buffy. He was moved by her, by what her life might
> be like. And he was moved by her beauty, obviously. He
> probably sensed that there was something special about her.
Like perhaps her courage. maybe even a sence of nobility
because of the odds she was facing? In many ways she was
the Anti-Darla just not the hair color :-). In short he met
someone whos love/approval he craved.
> Oh, and Whistler told him that he could actually be a person,
> instead of "an even more useless rodent" than he already was.
>
> So how does this transformation, this becoming, depend on
> Angel's desire to be the Hero, and to have fawning damsels
> looking upon him in awe and thankfulness?
Buffy was the damsel (perhaps the first successful one). she
was so Good he was seeking her approval instead of her fathers.
When he lost/left Buffy he got his sence of worth from the
people he saved. It is actually a consistent theme through
all 7+ years, even if not specificlly spelled out or described that
way before Patricide Flashback.
> If you even see Angel at the beginning of BtVS, you would
> have an idea of how ludicrous that idea is. And the same
> goes for Angel in S1 of his own series.
Disagree here, actually I think they support the idea. His
merely existing state pre buffy indicates something was
missing from his life.. That something was APPROVAL.
Spoken by Darla, but charachterized by all we know of
Liam/Angellous/Angel. The Difference in the three is
who they need the approval of.
Just Because Angel doesn't think this way consciously
doesn't change the validity of his emotional need.
A.E. Jabbour
>> I have absolutely no idea where this idea that Angel is
>> desperate to be admired and worshipped comes from. I can't
>> think of any evidence for that from the show. None.
>
> You have overstated this. He doesn't need a Cult following.
> he needs to rescue real life people from iminent death on an
> ongoing basis to prove to himself that he is a good guy.
> When he rescues them he recieves instant gratification in the
> form of the look in their eye. the Thanks in thier Voice.
Examples?
> When he doesn't get these things he is prone to feeling
> depressed (yes other reasons as well, it is a complex cycle).
> 1952 Hyperion Angel is a non helping guy, the gratitude
> he recieved from Judy... (Because he got mad at the other
> guy trying to invade his room, not because he wanted to
> help judy) started him down the path of fighting the Thessalac
> demon for reasons even he didn't understand. When her
> grattitude dried up in her fear, and she sent the mob after
> him... He walked out leaving them all to the demon.
That is one of the most bizarre interpretations I have ever
read.
And it also has nothing to do with this "look in their eyes"
or "thanks in their voices" stuff you keep talking about,
but not giving examples of.
>> If anything, he didn't take Doyle's words to heart enough.
>
> If you'll reread the threads the support for this has been
> covered in detail. As for Doyles words... these actions of
> making connections magnify the reinforcement he gets for
> saving people in person from iminent danger. Signing a
> name on a contract to help dozens of Faceless folk just doesn't
> provide the feedback for angel that saving a damsel from
> a hungry Vampire does.
Nor would it for me. And not because of any desire to have
some damsel thank me. It's because Angel didn't DO anything.
Signing the papers is irrelevant. ANyone could do it. The
"thing" that was actually done (and I thought that whole
scene was lame, but that's a different issue) was done by
others, probably Gunn, in planning those items. Signing
a piece of paper is nothing.
> If you need spoken words by a charachter, then Refrence
> Darla Talking to Angelous after Angelous kills the family
> of liam. This has been quoted in several messages.
Which has nothing to do with any of this. At all.
Nothing.
> That covers the root need of liam that is part of both Angel
> and Angelous.
Oh please.
> Liams father never aproved of him... Liam rebeled and
> acted the part of a total womanizing drunkard to get back
> at his father. Also attacked (verbally) his father for
> unspecified Corruption, one asumes (I do) of a monetary
> nature. When Angeleous was sired, he killed the village,
> the whole family to punish the father, and then killed his
> father. (well at least he had been attacking the village
> before he took out his family... all the garlic that had
> been hung). We know that Angelous planned to kill
> the entire village, and i think that he may have been
> credited with success. It is Angels MO to leave dad
> for Last or nearly last (though that is interpretation)
And, again, I am moved to ask: So?
I still haven't seen any evidence supporting this theory.
Not a bit.
Ian
> igs6...@yahoo.com (Ian) wrote in message news:<5aa58763.0311...@posting.google.com>...
> > Ah, I see what you're getting at.
> >
> > That's a pretty fine distinction, but it's pretty compelling for all
> > that. I'm not sure that I have sufficient regard for the writers to
> > really believe that they're capable of that kind of subtlety, but I
> > stand to be corrected.
>
> I don't.
If you say so. Unlike you, I don't know everything.
> Angel doesn't help the helpless with no thought for himself. He does
> it for the reward of feeling like a hero. Which I don't have a
> problem with, I don't think it makes him a bad guy or less a hero.
> The people he saves aren't less saved because Angel likes to hear he's
> a hero. Just as the people Spike saves are any less saved because he
> does it for love. The idea that Angel is somehow selfless and better
> than Spike is just plain silly. They're both in it for a personal
> reward.
LOL... and it all comes back to... Captain Peroxide. Because,
obviously, we can't be discussing Angel's motivations without
comparing the two of them.
> And so is everyone. Or didn't you ever notice how Mother Theresa just
> soaked up the publicity and loved the attention?
But, who do you think is better? Mother Theresa or Spike?
A.E. Jabbour
[snip]
> Disagree here, actually I think they support the idea. His
> merely existing state pre buffy indicates something was
> missing from his life.. That something was APPROVAL.
> Spoken by Darla, but charachterized by all we know of
> Liam/Angellous/Angel. The Difference in the three is
> who they need the approval of.
>
> Just Because Angel doesn't think this way consciously
> doesn't change the validity of his emotional need.
I just snipped the rest, since the problem is with the
form of your argument, which makes the specifics completely
irrelevant.
What you are doing is saying that a thing (Angel), let's
call it X, has a particular quality (needs to be seen
as a Champion or Hero), let's call it Y.
So, X has quality Y. This is what you are asserting.
But, you are using Z (the backstory with his father) as
evidence for the truth of Y. It is an explanation
of why Y exists. But it is not, in any way, proof that
Y exists.
You are completely skipping over the most important part
of your argument: the question of whether Y exists at
all!
I still have not read evidence that Angel has this
particular quality. All I have read are assertions that
he does. And these assertions have not been backed up
with anything, just more assertions, and some
explanations.
Thirsty Viking
> Thirsty Viking <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >> I have absolutely no idea where this idea that Angel is
> >> desperate to be admired and worshipped comes from. I can't
> >> think of any evidence for that from the show. None.
> >
> > You have overstated this. He doesn't need a Cult following.
> > he needs to rescue real life people from iminent death on an
> > ongoing basis to prove to himself that he is a good guy.
> > When he rescues them he recieves instant gratification in the
> > form of the look in their eye. the Thanks in thier Voice.
>
> Examples?
If you really need the examples, start watching season 1.
People ARE grateful for being saved.
Season 2 he hits a saving drought..
episode 5 all darla and innocents dying
episode 6 they don't save the girl, she is saved because
she wasn't a virgin. And what gratitude there is for
them coming goes to Wesley.
Episode 7 darla based, no innocents saved
episode 8 no one saved directly(Anonymous Victims saved)
Episode 9 the trial - Angel fails to cure Darla (not saved)
Episode 10 noone saved, Darla Sired by Dru, innocents die,
Angel abandons lawyers "I just can't seem to care".
Angel Fires AI. Angel saves NOONE, instead he condemns.
Episode 11 noone saved, angel is vendetta guy
Episode 12 noone saved, angel donates money stolen from
benifit to homeless sheltar
Episode 13 Angel saves world but no real grattitue
Episode 14 Evil averted no Damsels Crime returns
a murder every 2 weeks, a rape every 2 day
Angel knows feeling of a job making him crazy
Angel spurned by Cordy when he tries to visit Wes
"We don't need you" "Do us a favor and stay away"
This prevents angel from even learning he saved
the people in sheltar. (not to mention Cordy, Wes...)
Episode 15 Angel tries for a kamikaze run against senior
partners. Bottoms out in despair and sleeps with Darla-Vamp
There is a 11 episode summary with angel detached from
saving and emotionally spinning into the ground. He
bounces back rather quickly after he starts saving people
again. I mistakenly thought you were aware enough of
macro plots not to need that all spelled out for you.
I DO NOT suggest that it was the ONLY reason for his despair.
But it was in the mix.
> > When he doesn't get these things he is prone to feeling
> > depressed (yes other reasons as well, it is a complex cycle).
> > 1952 Hyperion Angel is a non helping guy, the gratitude
> > he recieved from Judy... (Because he got mad at the other
> > guy trying to invade his room, not because he wanted to
> > help judy) started him down the path of fighting the Thessalac
> > demon for reasons even he didn't understand. When her
> > grattitude dried up in her fear, and she sent the mob after
> > him... He walked out leaving them all to the demon.
>
> That is one of the most bizarre interpretations I have ever
> read.
really... hmmm... no other reason is shown for motivating
him to try and kill the thessalac demon. He was going to
throw Judy out in the hall untill he saw the guy trying to
pick the lock. His responce to the guy is based on the guy
intruding, not on judy. When he talks to the bookseller,
angel admits he doesn't know why he's trying to help.
> And it also has nothing to do with this "look in their eyes"
> or "thanks in their voices" stuff you keep talking about,
> but not giving examples of.
Judy is an example, the girl he saves at the start of the
series is an example, the actress who wanted to be a
vampire is an example, and just about every single
victim we are ever shown him saving is an example.
Rewatch AYNOHYEB Judy is ignored when she
tries to thank him and makes more attempts as the
show progressess to thank angel, and treat him as
having saved her. Being treated as a hero he tries
to be one, being treated later as a monster he tells
the demon to take them all (or something similar)
50ish years later he is a champion and decided to
try and track down that thessalac demon.
> >> If anything, he didn't take Doyle's words to heart enough.
> >
> > If you'll reread the threads the support for this has been
> > covered in detail. As for Doyles words... these actions of
> > making connections magnify the reinforcement he gets for
> > saving people in person from iminent danger. Signing a
> > name on a contract to help dozens of Faceless folk just doesn't
> > provide the feedback for angel that saving a damsel from
> > a hungry Vampire does.
>
> Nor would it for me. And not because of any desire to have
> some damsel thank me.
Noone has expressed that it was a conscious desire, but
a basic need in Angel. this point has been made several
times, you appear to be ignoring it. The APPROVAL
he recives is like the Motor Oil that keeps a car running
smoothly. When it is cut off, it is only a matter of time
before he emotionally sizes up like in ARNOHYEB, or
like he was pre whistler.
> It's because Angel didn't DO anything.
> Signing the papers is irrelevant. ANyone could do it. The
> "thing" that was actually done (and I thought that whole
> scene was lame, but that's a different issue) was done by
> others, probably Gunn, in planning those items. Signing
> a piece of paper is nothing.
And yet only ANGEL's signiture would accomplish the task.
So it wasn't anyone that could do it. And the only reason
Angel was in position to do it was because of angels past
actions (including decision to take offer of WR&H LA)
> > If you need spoken words by a charachter, then Refrence
> > Darla Talking to Angelous after Angelous kills the family
> > of liam. This has been quoted in several messages.
>
> Which has nothing to do with any of this. At all.
> Nothing.
But they do, what we were "informs all that we Become"
I think I have remembered it correctly.
> > That covers the root need of liam that is part of both Angel
> > and Angelous.
>
> Oh please.
You asked i spelled it out. you can reject it out of
hand all you want. It is a model of behaviour that
has some support in canon and is consistent with
the entire liam/angelous/Angel arc to date.
> > Liams father never aproved of him... Liam rebeled and
> > acted the part of a total womanizing drunkard to get back
> > at his father. Also attacked (verbally) his father for
> > unspecified Corruption, one asumes (I do) of a monetary
> > nature. When Angeleous was sired, he killed the village,
> > the whole family to punish the father, and then killed his
> > father. (well at least he had been attacking the village
> > before he took out his family... all the garlic that had
> > been hung). We know that Angelous planned to kill
> > the entire village, and i think that he may have been
> > credited with success. It is Angels MO to leave dad
> > for Last or nearly last (though that is interpretation)
>
> And, again, I am moved to ask: So?
>
> I still haven't seen any evidence supporting this theory.
> Not a bit.
Then that is only because you refuse to.
Thirsty Viking
> Thirsty Viking <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Disagree here, actually I think they support the idea. His
> > merely existing state pre buffy indicates something was
> > missing from his life.. That something was APPROVAL.
> > Spoken by Darla, but charachterized by all we know of
> > Liam/Angellous/Angel. The Difference in the three is
> > who they need the approval of.
> >
> > Just Because Angel doesn't think this way consciously
> > doesn't change the validity of his emotional need.
>
> I just snipped the rest, since the problem is with the
> form of your argument, which makes the specifics completely
> irrelevant.
>
> What you are doing is saying that a thing (Angel), let's
> call it X, has a particular quality (needs to be seen
> as a Champion or Hero), let's call it Y.
>
> So, X has quality Y. This is what you are asserting.
>
> But, you are using Z (the backstory with his father) as
> evidence for the truth of Y. It is an explanation
> of why Y exists. But it is not, in any way, proof that
> Y exists.
I also use
A (the Hyperion episode)
B (angels growing detactchment this season)
C (the epiphany arc)
All of which are consistent with Y
What has not been shown by you or anyone is how Y
is in anyway contradictory to what has been shown.
> You are completely skipping over the most important part
> of your argument: the question of whether Y exists at
> all!
> I still have not read evidence that Angel has this
> particular quality. All I have read are assertions that
> he does. And these assertions have not been backed up
> with anything, just more assertions, and some
> explanations.
See A B C
Prove an electron exists... you can only show me evidence
consistent with the presence of an electron. You can not
show me an electron.
X atoms have quality Y elctrons
Z is the presence of atoms being able to have a charge
you can find lots of evidence CONSISTENT with electron
but that doesn't PROVE electrons... However we have found
NO EVIDENCE that refutes electrons. Therefore the theory
of electrons is accepted as fact till we learn otherwise.
I gave you the consistent explanation, disprove it.
Show me contrary evidence. that is how science works.
Theory is accepted and used until it is found not to apply,
then better theory is sought.
This is the same with CaSpike being Disembodied mentalist.
Can't be PROOVED, but it is the best model with nothing to
contradict it on the Show to date.
gio
> Thirsty Viking <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >> I have absolutely no idea where this idea that Angel is
> >> desperate to be admired and worshipped comes from. I can't
> >> think of any evidence for that from the show. None.
> >
> > You have overstated this. He doesn't need a Cult following.
> > he needs to rescue real life people from iminent death on an
> > ongoing basis to prove to himself that he is a good guy.
> > When he rescues them he recieves instant gratification in the
> > form of the look in their eye. the Thanks in thier Voice.
>
> Examples?
So you are saying he doesn't care about that aspect at all. How do
YOU think he feels when he saves someone? "Oh Shit! I had to save
someone's life again, this really sucks, why do I have to do this
stuff? I could be at home listening to my Barry Manilow tapes or
watching Solent Green on DVD."
>
> > When he doesn't get these things he is prone to feeling
> > depressed (yes other reasons as well, it is a complex cycle).
> > 1952 Hyperion Angel is a non helping guy, the gratitude
> > he recieved from Judy... (Because he got mad at the other
> > guy trying to invade his room, not because he wanted to
> > help judy) started him down the path of fighting the Thessalac
> > demon for reasons even he didn't understand. When her
> > grattitude dried up in her fear, and she sent the mob after
> > him... He walked out leaving them all to the demon.
>
> That is one of the most bizarre interpretations I have ever
> read.
It doesn't seem that bizarre to me.
>
> And it also has nothing to do with this "look in their eyes"
> or "thanks in their voices" stuff you keep talking about,
> but not giving examples of.
Yes it does. Cause and effect. When he didn't get the instant
gratification of the "We love you Angel, you're such a hero" he gave
up first time up to bat.
>
> >> If anything, he didn't take Doyle's words to heart enough.
> >
> > If you'll reread the threads the support for this has been
> > covered in detail. As for Doyles words... these actions of
> > making connections magnify the reinforcement he gets for
> > saving people in person from iminent danger. Signing a
> > name on a contract to help dozens of Faceless folk just doesn't
> > provide the feedback for angel that saving a damsel from
> > a hungry Vampire does.
>
> Nor would it for me. And not because of any desire to have
> some damsel thank me. It's because Angel didn't DO anything.
> Signing the papers is irrelevant. ANyone could do it. The
> "thing" that was actually done (and I thought that whole
> scene was lame, but that's a different issue) was done by
> others, probably Gunn, in planning those items. Signing
> a piece of paper is nothing.
Err, I've got a paper for you to sign here. It's called the deeds to
your house. Sign it, hey, it doesn't count for anything.
>
> > If you need spoken words by a charachter, then Refrence
> > Darla Talking to Angelous after Angelous kills the family
> > of liam. This has been quoted in several messages.
>
> Which has nothing to do with any of this. At all.
> Nothing.
>
> > That covers the root need of liam that is part of both Angel
> > and Angelous.
>
> Oh please.
>
> > Liams father never aproved of him... Liam rebeled and
> > acted the part of a total womanizing drunkard to get back
> > at his father. Also attacked (verbally) his father for
> > unspecified Corruption, one asumes (I do) of a monetary
> > nature. When Angeleous was sired, he killed the village,
> > the whole family to punish the father, and then killed his
> > father. (well at least he had been attacking the village
> > before he took out his family... all the garlic that had
> > been hung). We know that Angelous planned to kill
> > the entire village, and i think that he may have been
> > credited with success. It is Angels MO to leave dad
> > for Last or nearly last (though that is interpretation)
>
> And, again, I am moved to ask: So?
>
> I still haven't seen any evidence supporting this theory.
> Not a bit.
No evidence that both Angelus and Angel like to leave their mark in
good or in evil? I think the evidence is there. Whether you care to
interprete it in this way is of course up to you. But I don't think
you can reasonably claim that there IS no evidence of this
characteristic in his actions.
gio
A.E. Jabbour
> Prove an electron exists... you can only show me evidence
> consistent with the presence of an electron. You can not
> show me an electron.
Actually ....
> X atoms have quality Y elctrons
> Z is the presence of atoms being able to have a charge
>
> you can find lots of evidence CONSISTENT with electron
> but that doesn't PROVE electrons... However we have found
> NO EVIDENCE that refutes electrons. Therefore the theory
> of electrons is accepted as fact till we learn otherwise.
O.K., I think that J.J. Thomson might have had something to
say about that. But since he is dead, let's leave it to
any text on physics. You can look it up, really!
Electrons are not a theory. Electrons are "an elementary
particle which is the negatively charged constituent of
ordinary matter. The electron is the lightest particle
which possesses an electric charge. Its rest mass is
m.e ~= 9.1 x 10^-28 g, about 1/1836 of the mass of the
proton or neutron, which are, respectively, the positively
charged and neutral constituents of ordinary matter.
Discovered in 1895 by J.J. Thomson in the form of
cathode rays, the electron was the first elementary
particle to be identified." (McGraw-Hill Concise
Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, 4th Ed.
pg. 699)
Electrons not only exist in more than theory, they can
be manipulated, measured, etc.
You can read about Thomson's experiements in numerous
places.
> I gave you the consistent explanation, disprove it.
> Show me contrary evidence. that is how science works.
> Theory is accepted and used until it is found not to apply,
> then better theory is sought.
No, that is exactly NOT how science works.
Look up "Theorem" in any logic text. A theorem is either
correct or incorrect, based upon the way in which it is
constructed from its premises.
It becomes "True" or not when it can be shown to be in
accord with observable facts.
> This is the same with CaSpike being Disembodied mentalist.
> Can't be PROOVED, but it is the best model with nothing to
> contradict it on the Show to date.
Oh sheesh. Call it whatever you want. What it is is ...
oh that's a whole different discussion.
Shawn H
: "Lord Usher" <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
: news:Xns942E832448D...@216.40.28.74...
:> I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode again
:> before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've finally
:> found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
:>
:> Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
:>
:> (SPOILERS are below...)
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
:> .
: My spouse and I were not particularly impressed with the episode, but what I
: do like is seeing Angel interacting with people outside of the core gang
: again. That was what his mission in Los Angeles was all about to begin
: with, reaching out, touching others with his own experiences and he
: definitely did that in this ep.
Which made S1 the dullest and most formulaic of all, until they began finding
their footing in Shanshu.
:>
: The other bit I liked was when he told number 5 that living is the hard
: part, i.e. throwing yourself on the pyre isn't what being a hero and
: redemption are all about.
Now where have I heard this before?
shawn
Shawn H
: I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode again
: found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
: Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
Oh dear God.
: (SPOILERS are below...)
: If nothing else, this was a show that was deeply, fully, and uniquely
: ANGEL.
All the least interesting sides of it.
: The story of Numero Cinco played upon nearly everything that makes ANGEL
: what it is. Its multicultural urban setting. Its hard-boiled film-noir
: coolness. Its focus on what makes a hero and a man. Even its new HELL-A
: LAW setting, and its attendant exploration of corporate alienation.
And the big message of all that? Being a hero is hard, and men die only when
their work is done. Big whup.
: That's a desire that's still fully in keeping with post-Epiphany Angel,
: and a concern that makes perfect sense in light of what he's gone
: through over the past few seasons. For the first time in quite a few
: episodes, I'm eager to see where Angel's crisis of self-identity will
: take him.
To finally becoming a real boy of course. I'm sorry, this episode didn't
simply explore some of these significant issues. It WALLOWED in them, in
maudlin and transparently ruefel excess. It was like watching circus towns try
to teach children about life, and arriving at only the most obvious of
cliches.
Though I can see how it fits into LA, Angel's existential dilemma, and early
challenges like AYNORHEB. My response is colored by the fact that Angel is the
LEAST interesting part of his show to me, and always has been. He has neither
the charisma nor the significance/urgency (in his role as damsel-saviour) that
Buffy had as the Slayer. While her series was about bucking against the norms
and re-writing conventions, Angel has always been more conservative, more
about re-iterating and updating the conventions. There's a high-level of
sophistication to his urban detective, and a playfulness with all the demonic
magic around, but those MOTW episodes do not set him off as well as the more
arc-centric ones do. "Lineage" seemed to hint at an arc, which I hope it
carries through with in this likely final season.
But I'm here for the supporting cast. Once that was Cordelia, now it's Fred
and Wesley and Gunn.
Shawn
Shawn H
: Angel is a good guy; but selfless he is not. I've never seen anything
: on the show to suggest he is.
The idea that you have to be selfless in order to be good is a recurrent one
on this group. Though it's being rejected more often lately. I guess I should
be grateful to Spike's popularity for that one. Good on you, mate!
Shawn
Lord Usher
news:bp0bea$7mi$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu:
> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>: I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode
>: again before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've
>: finally found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
>
>: Damn. That was a pretty darn powerful piece of work.
>
> Oh dear God.
I love you too, Shawn.
But I'm not gonna debate you. Lord knows I've tried my damdest in the past,
but there comes a time when you start to question the point of arguing with
someone whose typical response when you say "That argument makes no logical
sense" is "I don't care."
Maybe some other time...
--
Lord Usher
"I'm here to kill you, not to judge you."
Lord Usher
>> > Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't
>> > get the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The
>> > Hyperion fifty years ago. Beige Angel. Rat eating Angel.
>>
>> Oh, come *on*!
>>
>> *None* of these had *anything* to do with Angel thinking he deserved
>> "recognition." They all had to do with Angel despairing of making a
>> difference, because either humanity was beyond help, or he was, or
>> both.
>
> Doesn't have anything to do with thinking. Has to do with reality...
> The gratitude and recognition that angel recieves is like motor oil
> that keeps the engine from siezing up.
You can keep saying that, but it doesn't make it true.
You are falling into the typical trap of confusing correlation with
causation. Yes, in these moments of crisis Angel stops saving people and
receiving their gratitude. But it doesn't therefore follow that this
lack of gratitude *causes* his crises.
And the episodes in question make it unmistakably clear that the lack of
gratitude *isn't* the cause, inasmuch as they went to a lot of trouble
to set up complex psychological motivations for Angel that did not
center around, "Oh, boo hoo, no one is thanking me."
Take the Beige Angel arc, for instance. The writers actually *spell out*
the motivation for Angel's behavior:
"I thought, if I could save you [Darla], I'd somehow be saving myself.
But I was wrong. And when I failed..." ("Epiphany")
"You know what my problem is? I'm screwed. That's my problem. I can't
win. I'm trying to atone for a hundred years of unthinkable evil.
Newsflash -- I never can!" ("Happy Anniversary")
As I said before, the arc was about Angel despairing of ever atoning for
his misdeeds, *not* about needing the hopeless he saves to thank him.
(Indeed, if he we so concerned about receiving their thanks, you'd think
he would, y'know, keep trying to saving them instead of cutting himself
off from them altogether.)
Lord Usher
dnff_dqF7...@comcast.com:
>> I just snipped the rest, since the problem is with the
>> form of your argument, which makes the specifics completely
>> irrelevant.
>>
>> What you are doing is saying that a thing (Angel), let's
>> call it X, has a particular quality (needs to be seen
>> as a Champion or Hero), let's call it Y.
>>
>> So, X has quality Y. This is what you are asserting.
>>
>> But, you are using Z (the backstory with his father) as
>> evidence for the truth of Y. It is an explanation
>> of why Y exists. But it is not, in any way, proof that
>> Y exists.
>
> I also use
> A (the Hyperion episode)
> B (angels growing detactchment this season)
> C (the epiphany arc)
>
> All of which are consistent with Y
So what?
It's also consistent with a lot of other possible explanations, many of
which make more sense -- and some of which are spelled out explicitly
within the text.
You have still yet to provide any evidence that would favor your
particular explanation over these alternatives.
> Prove an electron exists... you can only show me evidence
> consistent with the presence of an electron. You can not
> show me an electron.
But you can, more specifically, show evidence that is more consistent
with the existence of electrons than with their nonexistence. That is
not the case here.
Lord Usher
news:c7902983.03111...@posting.google.com:
>> You're *really* reaching here.
>
> Not at all. No one's saying this is the ONLY reason Angel does what
> he does. Just that this is what makes it all worthwhile to him,
> personally. This is what gives him the little boost that keeps him
> going.
Okay, but these are two different things -- why you do something, versus
what keeps you going.
There is a marked difference between saying, "Angel helps the hopeless so
that people will congratulate him," and saying, "Angel helps the hopeless
because he thinks it's important to do good, but it's their gratitude that
sustains him through the endless and difficult fight."
Thirsty Viking
> "Thirsty Viking" <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote in news:fd-
> dnff_dqF7...@comcast.com:
>
> >> I just snipped the rest, since the problem is with the
> >> form of your argument, which makes the specifics completely
> >> irrelevant.
> >>
> >> What you are doing is saying that a thing (Angel), let's
> >> call it X, has a particular quality (needs to be seen
> >> as a Champion or Hero), let's call it Y.
> >>
> >> So, X has quality Y. This is what you are asserting.
> >>
> >> But, you are using Z (the backstory with his father) as
> >> evidence for the truth of Y. It is an explanation
> >> of why Y exists. But it is not, in any way, proof that
> >> Y exists.
I still disagree with your effort to say Z doesn't matter.
Especially since it is in Canon exposition of the existance
of Y as a motivational factor for Liam (and thus all the
later incarnations of Liam)
> > I also use
> > A (the Hyperion episode)
> > B (angels growing detactchment this season)
> > C (the epiphany arc)
> >
> > All of which are consistent with Y
>
> So what?
I was asked for evidence... they are evidence.
> It's also consistent with a lot of other possible explanations, many of
> which make more sense -- and some of which are spelled out explicitly
> within the text.
Give one that makes MORE sence. You may find one you like
more, but that isn't the same as making more sense.
> You have still yet to provide any evidence that would favor your
> particular explanation over these alternatives.
Depending on which theories you are vaguely hinting at, they
may not conflict, and may coexist. Thier existance may not
invalidate this theory. And I did support my theory with evidence.
I have never Claimed that this theory is the only explanation for
any behavior of angel that can be true.
You claim there is another theory.. but you don't post it, you don't
back it up, you don't explain how it is Better... let alone why they
can't exist side by side.
> > Prove an electron exists... you can only show me evidence
> > consistent with the presence of an electron. You can not
> > show me an electron.
>
> But you can, more specifically, show evidence that is more consistent
> with the existence of electrons than with their nonexistence. That is
> not the case here.
Ok show me ANY evidence that suggests that my theory on
Angel is WRONG... Cause I don't see anything in the show
that Disproves it. And I don't recall anything posted that has
conflicted.
Unless you can actually adress the issues, I'm done with this.
I addressed issues those rasied by others who dislike this theory,
even though they were without substance, and the arguments
kept shifting as I refuted them.
Objection without reason or support seems like trolling
Thirsty Viking
> him...@animail.net (himiko) wrote in
> news:c7902983.03111...@posting.google.com:
>
> >> You're *really* reaching here.
> >
> > Not at all. No one's saying this is the ONLY reason Angel does what
> > he does. Just that this is what makes it all worthwhile to him,
> > personally. This is what gives him the little boost that keeps him
> > going.
>
> Okay, but these are two different things -- why you do something, versus
> what keeps you going.
WTF did you think the motor oil analagy was you ignored consistently.
Motor Oil isn't what makes the engine run, it is one of the things that
keeps it from breaking.
> There is a marked difference between saying, "Angel helps the hopeless so
> that people will congratulate him," and saying, "Angel helps the hopeless
> because he thinks it's important to do good, but it's their gratitude that
> sustains him through the endless and difficult fight."
Really splitting hairs to get out of this, thats what we have been
consistently saying.
Thirsty Viking
> "Thirsty Viking" <jdoe...@kill.spam.comcast.net> wrote in
> news:TOydnS6BPNt...@comcast.com:
>
>
> >> > Why is it a stretch? Where is it stretching? When Angel didn't
> >> > get the recognition he thought he deserves, he has quit. The
> >> > Hyperion fifty years ago. Beige Angel. Rat eating Angel.
> >>
> >> Oh, come *on*!
> >>
> >> *None* of these had *anything* to do with Angel thinking he deserved
> >> "recognition." They all had to do with Angel despairing of making a
> >> difference, because either humanity was beyond help, or he was, or
> >> both.
> > Doesn't have anything to do with thinking. Has to do with reality...
> > The gratitude and recognition that angel recieves is like motor oil
> > that keeps the engine from siezing up.
>
> You can keep saying that, but it doesn't make it true.
Nor does it make it false... It is a specific illustation of the role I see
it playing that you continually ignore so you can argue against what
I'm not saying.
> You are falling into the typical trap of confusing correlation with
> causation. Yes, in these moments of crisis Angel stops saving people and
> receiving their gratitude. But it doesn't therefore follow that this
> lack of gratitude *causes* his crises.
He actually stops saving in the periode leading up to the crisis,
not just the episode of the crisis.
> And the episodes in question make it unmistakably clear that the lack of
> gratitude *isn't* the cause, inasmuch as they went to a lot of trouble
> to set up complex psychological motivations for Angel that did not
> center around, "Oh, boo hoo, no one is thanking me."
Among the things they set up was angel failing to recieve that
reinforcement on an ongoing basis leading up to it. And the
explanation about Liams father never aproving of him that
will last a lifetime.
> Take the Beige Angel arc, for instance. The writers actually *spell out*
> the motivation for Angel's behavior:
>
> "I thought, if I could save you [Darla], I'd somehow be saving myself.
> But I was wrong. And when I failed..." ("Epiphany")
Since he Failed, we will never know for sure what success
would have meant for him. .... Also Failing to save her after
so much effort and its affect on him is in support of my theory.
As is how quickly he rebounds when he saves the AI crew and
gives Cordy Clothing... I think he actually smiled with joy
at her grattitude.
> "You know what my problem is? I'm screwed. That's my problem. I can't
> win. I'm trying to atone for a hundred years of unthinkable evil.
> Newsflash -- I never can!" ("Happy Anniversary")
These are the surface motivations.... Before that whole
"Sence and Sensibility" episode Kate would never have
claimed to have been a Cop because she was searching
for her Daddy to approve of her, to love her, to praise her.
But that didn't change that from being her true motivation.
Doesn't matter that she'd have said... "I want to help people"
or whatever plattitude would have come out.
Angels big revelation in Sence and Sensibility ...
"What our parent do to us".... (Deprive of approval)
Parralell story line Angel and Kate (an ME Favorite)
Also Wes, but not seen in this episode.
As for the unspeakable evil, Angel saw himself doing all
those actions. And he still does probably. Notice that he
did unspeakable evil for a century, and he is ready to give
up attonement after less than a decade. The I'm screwed
statement is from an emotional evaluation, not a logical
one that would suggest he needs to work a lot longer
before he can adequately judge that. 150 years of being
a champion might do it... or maybe 300 since he spends
so much time moping.
> As I said before, the arc was about Angel despairing of ever atoning for
> his misdeeds, *not* about needing the hopeless he saves to thank him.
Never claimed it was the surface thoughts of Angel.
> (Indeed, if he we so concerned about receiving their thanks, you'd think
> he would, y'know, keep trying to saving them instead of cutting himself
> off from them altogether.)
As already mentioned you are trying to redefine what I have said.
MLGM
> mlgm...@yahoo.com (MLGM) wrote in
> news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com:
>
> > I don't. Angel (and for that matter, what we've seen Angelus and
> > Liam) all want people to look up to them. They want to be the boss
> > man and big shot. This doesn't make Angel a bad guy; but this idea
> > that he wants no reward is silly. Angel never helps and leaves.
>
> Except when he obviously does. As in the "Conviction" scene that you keep
> trying to mischaracterize.
>
have simply left. He's certainly walked off and left Wes and Gunn
when they wanted info from.
> But, anyway, when he does stop for a chat, why do you assume that it's
> purely for recognition? Recall that, in the very first episode of the
> series, Doyle explained to him that he shouldn't just save people and run
> off -- not because it's cool to get a "reward," but because it's important
> to *connect with people* lest they become nothing more than ticks on a
> balance sheet that Angel doesn't really care about.
But even in the beginning he stayed and let people praise him. Doyle
wanted Angel to see people as people; not as a source of
gratification; because if he didn't Angel would begin to see them as
sources of other kind of gratification. But Doyle proves the point.
Without someone telling Angel what a hero he is, he backslides. Doyle
points out that he already is well on his way to giving up; because
Angel isn't getting enough ego strokes.
Thirsty Viking
"MLGM" <mlgm...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75f34eb.03111...@posting.google.com...
Hehe that is maybe a bit over interpreted lol
(remember I've been championing the importance of the ego boost)
Certainly being connected with people is more in line with approval.
Oddly enough it was when they disaproved of letting the vamps
have the lawyers, that angel fired all the AI crew. I would not
say that he fired them solely because they disapproved... but that
disapproval did stand in the way of angel getting real dark to fight
the Duo... so it is hard to say it wasn't a factor with any certainty.
"I can't do it with you guys watching" might be an accurate summary.
The loytalty of the crew is a huge statement of approval for angel.
Wes admits they are there because of Angels mission. That GrooSlug
was not a replacement for Angel (thpough we would have made a fine
team addition IMO with or without the visions.)
Shawn H
: Shawn H <shill#@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in
: news:bp0bea$7mi$1...@news.fas.harvard.edu:
:> Lord Usher <lord_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:>: I know these thoughts are late, but I needed to watch the episode
:>: again before commenting, to make sure I was judging it fairly. I've
:>: finally found the time to watch the tape, and my judgment is --
:>
:> Oh dear God.
: I love you too, Shawn.
: But I'm not gonna debate you. Lord knows I've tried my damdest in the past,
: but there comes a time when you start to question the point of arguing with
: someone whose typical response when you say "That argument makes no logical
: sense" is "I don't care."
: Maybe some other time...
Maybe if you thought of these interactions as discussions, rather than
debates, you might come closer to understanding my approach.
I simply found it all too typical that you devoted your highest praise of
the season to an episode I thought was the worst in some time.
Shawn
Thirsty Viking
"Shawn H" <shill#@fas.harvard.edu> wrote in message
news:bp8j60$1im$2...@news.fas.harvard.edu...
That could be a difference in taste... if you read the reviews, many gave
it a 4+
so LU is far from alone in praising tCToNC
Shawn H
:> I simply found it all too typical that you devoted your highest praise of
:> the season to an episode I thought was the worst in some time.
: That could be a difference in taste... if you read the reviews, many gave
Of COURSE it's a difference in taste!! What else could it be? But because
our judgments are based on subjective enjoyment, does that mean there's
no way to discuss and compare them? No purpose at all?
: it a 4+
: so LU is far from alone in praising tCToNC
I seemed to think of the scores as divisive; ie, it was one of those love
it or hate episodes. Some are nearly universally loathed, and others are
heaped with praise. Perhaps George's results and season standings will
bear this out.
Shawn
Lord Usher
>> --Okay, I see what you're saying now. It's true, Wes did say "hope
>> that the work has meaning," not "hope that you'll get a reward" or
>> something of that sort. So if Angel fulfills the prophecy and gets
>> his reward--rehumanization--that's something to be desired *just
>> because* it ratifies his status as hero and shows that the work has
>> meaning?
>>
>> The trouble is, I still don't see why Angel can't see the meaning his
>> work has just from the happy, grateful faces of people whose lives he
>> has saved, or whom he has helped in other ways.
>
> But that's just it, angel isn't seeing many faces
Exactly. That's precisely the problem with the kind of big-picture work
with which Angel is now involved. It's easy to feel like you're doing good
when you save some helpless victim from marauding demons. It's much harder
when you're letting marauding demons go free in the hope that you'll one
day be able to dismantle the system that supports them.
ISTM that the affirmation Angel is looking for is basically, "Yes, you are
still that same noble champion who helped the hopeless one person at a
time. Yes, you're still fighting the Good Fight, even though it might not
seem like it sometimes."
Whether that's actually true remains to be seen...
kenm47
So you're saying the new intended audience for the show are those
benevolent philosopher kings, captains of industry? Somehow, I don't
think that's the demographic the sponsors were hoping for.
Ken (Brooklyn)
Lord Usher
news:4c527512.03111...@posting.google.com:
>> Exactly. That's precisely the problem with the kind of big-picture
>> work with which Angel is now involved. It's easy to feel like you're
>> doing good when you save some helpless victim from marauding demons.
>> It's much harder when you're letting marauding demons go free in the
>> hope that you'll one day be able to dismantle the system that
>> supports them.
>>
>> ISTM that the affirmation Angel is looking for is basically, "Yes,
>> you are still that same noble champion who helped the hopeless one
>> person at a time. Yes, you're still fighting the Good Fight, even
>> though it might not seem like it sometimes."
>>
>> Whether that's actually true remains to be seen...
>
> So you're saying the new intended audience for the show are those
> benevolent philosopher kings, captains of industry? Somehow, I don't
> think that's the demographic the sponsors were hoping for.
Yup. And before this season the target audience were social activists and
vigilantes. :)
No, I think the series' appeal extends beyond Angel's literal real-world
counterparts. Because can't pretty much everyone over twenty-five identify
with that feeling of selling out to the Man? That fear that you're not the
same person you were when you were younger, that you've given up on all the
things you used to care about?
himiko
>
> No, I think the series' appeal extends beyond Angel's literal real-world
> counterparts. Because can't pretty much everyone over twenty-five identify
> with that feeling of selling out to the Man? That fear that you're not the
> same person you were when you were younger, that you've given up on all the
> things you used to care about?
I think 25 is a high estimate. Try anyone out of high school...and
sometimes still while in high school. This is, in fact, the story
BTVS should have been telling, but that's water under the bridge. At
least they're telling it now.
They're telling it well too. Angel and his friends show a wide range
of motivations and responses to the whole selling out theme:
Angel: He hates the day to day work itself and doesn't have any gut
level feeling that he's doing good; indeed he often feels he's doing
wrong. He sold out for the most common reason of all: for the sake of
his child. And sad to say, I think he probably represents 2/3 of the
American work force.
Gunn: A young man on the rise. He sold out to "better himself," to
become a member or a higher class and economic group. To his
surprise, he found a true calling and love in the law and his legal
education. At the moment he's at the crest of his personal wave. He
loves what he does and truly believes he's doing good. Do I think
that wave is going to come crashing down one way or another? You bet
I do.
Fred: She loves the day to day work even when it frazzles her; she
always has. She sold out for that lab and to be able to do that work.
She's always had the calling Gunn is just beginning to discover, and
she knows there are real dangers in this kind of love for one's work.
She's trying to avoid the pitfalls very conscienciously, but that's
doesn't mean she won't fall into one just the same. Right now, the
most likely pitfall is named Knox and is wearing a white coat much
like hers.
Lorne: He sold out for shallow, tinseltown celebrity and he loves it.
I don't think he sees it as selling out, actually. Lorne seems to me
to be pretty amoral. He's good-natured, kind, and empathic, three
traits which, combined with the company he keeps, keep him acting like
a nice guy, but I'm not convinced he has a moral compass of any kind.
I do think that the thing he loves may well turn on him in some way,
or perhaps he'll just become disillusioned with it. Sometimes getting
something too fast and too easily ruins it, and that may turn out to
be the case with Lorne...or not.
Wes: He didn't sell out. He wanted to. He would have sold out for
Lilah, but W&H wouldn't go that far. He settled in without selling
out. He hangs around for the sake of his friends who he believes,
with reason, need his guidance in this new world. He does, however,
genuinely enjoy being able to do the work he loves the very best he
can with the very best equipment. Sometimes he wonders if that is
selling out.
Spike: The major refusenik in the bunch and the moral voice of AI at
the moment...and yeah, I think when Spike is your moral voice, you're
in trouble. But he hasn't sold out at all. Twice he's been offered
the thing he most wants, a corporeal body, and twice he's turned it
down; of course, there's always the "third time's a charm" thing. But
at the moment, Spike is the non-sellout, spitting defiance in the face
of W&H a.k.a. the "establishment," the "man," or whatever you call it.
Note that he is also the eternal adolescent.
himiko
Wei-Li Sun
> As I said in my 5 star poll review, it's almost as if he was talking to
> himself (of course, in the end he was talking to himself as #5 had left). As
> though he himself needed the pep talk. To remind himself of just why he
> keeps going and doing his hero schickt. Angel is questioning himself. DB
> played it very well.
I guess the existentialism era is over *sigh* I actually liked it better that way.
Wei-Li
Clairel
--Sounds like you're much more on board with Greenwalt's
Greenpeace/Shell idea of season 5's metaphorical meaning than you were
when he first trotted it out in that interview last spring, LU.
I'm finding it more meaningful now, myself. The ME writers are doing
interesting things with the heroes-within-W&H situation. Mind you,
what I wrote above about the subtle corruption that Angel and the
others are being subjected to still holds true. And I still don't
think that getting reassurance of his heroic status through the
Shanshu prophecy is really what Angel *needs*--it's a poor substitute
for personal contact with individuals whom he has benefited, which is
what Angel actually needs to sustain him in his work and raise his
morale. Reliance on the Shanshu prophecy for reassurance is going to
turn out to be a shaky crutch, I think, and it could have disastrous
consequences.
Clairel
Wei-Li Sun
> So you're saying the new intended audience for the show are those
> benevolent philosopher kings, captains of industry? Somehow, I don't
> think that's the demographic the sponsors were hoping for.
>
> Ken (Brooklyn)
No, the new intended audience are the people who know NOTHING about
philosophy. Since "Epiphany" the show's turned completely existential
and from what I can gather in this newsgroup (and the people around
me), existentialist views don't fly (and you REALLY have to read some
very boring books to understand existentialism ... the Cliff's Notes
version gave me a headache that lasted two days) ... so I'm not
surprised the show has gone back to the simple (Christian) concept of
work hard, follow rules, reward at the end.
Wei-Li
Shawn H
: WTF did you think the motor oil analagy was you ignored consistently.
: Motor Oil isn't what makes the engine run, it is one of the things that
: keeps it from breaking.
:> There is a marked difference between saying, "Angel helps the hopeless so
:> that people will congratulate him," and saying, "Angel helps the hopeless
:> because he thinks it's important to do good, but it's their gratitude that
:> sustains him through the endless and difficult fight."
: Really splitting hairs to get out of this, thats what we have been
: consistently saying.
All too typical, really. I'm afraid I can't really parse the "marked
difference" myself. Angel wants to do good; Angel likes adulation. These
are not contradictory statements.
Shawn
ilmaestro
proclaimed:
I think the 'marked difference' is the reasoning of why Angel likes
adulation; is it because he wants to feel good about himself/is doing
Good Things for more than slightly selfish reasons? or is it because
when he receives adulation, he then knows that he has probably done a
Good Thing, and is still helping people?
--
ilmaestro
"No you don't. But thanks for saying it."
Lord Usher
news:1faed770.03111...@posting.google.com:
>> No, I think the series' appeal extends beyond Angel's literal
>> real-world counterparts. Because can't pretty much everyone over
>> twenty-five identify with that feeling of selling out to the Man?
>> That fear that you're not the same person you were when you were
>> younger, that you've given up on all the things you used to care
>> about?
>
> --Sounds like you're much more on board with Greenwalt's
> Greenpeace/Shell idea of season 5's metaphorical meaning than you were
> when he first trotted it out in that interview last spring, LU.
Oh, I never had a problem with the Greenpeace/Shell Oil idea. My initial
reaction was something along the lines of, "Yay! They're using metaphor
again!"
You may be thinking of my reaction to Greenie's "I'm glad the show
doesn't have to be so dark anymore" comment, which was reported in the
same interview, and which I thought was pretty stupid.
> Reliance on the Shanshu prophecy for reassurance is going to turn out
> to be a shaky crutch, I think, and it could have disastrous
> consequences
Oh, I agree. In fact, I might go you one step further -- I think it's
quite possible that the healthiest thing Angel could do would be to give
up altogether on the idea that he's a prophesied champion of destiny. I
wonder if he's really a better man because he thinks he's an extra-
special hero, or whether he'd be more of a hero if he accepted that he
was just an ordinary man.