(miss murchison made me do this). "Soul-Set Time?" (post script) -- AtS 5.22 Not Fade Away : comments.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17 |
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
(no subject)
Thanks for the reminder. My problem is that -- although it's only logical and right that vampires should be pure evil if they have no souls -- the way the vampires are PORTRAYED by some of the actors leave room for doubt (they seem so HUMAN, at times).
And even when Spike was full-on, bad-ass, evil-master-vampire-guy who'd sooner murder a human than look at them, he was as loyal as he knew how to be to DRU, at least (though she did not, or could not, reciprocate -- especially once Angelus was back in the picture). As ditzy and shallow and unreliable as Harmony always was, and as prone to disloyalty even BEFORE she was made a vampire, there WERE times when she seemed capable of something approaching loyalty and a desire to be better than she was.
I guess having vampires around (even cute ones) is sort of like what they say about keeping big wild cats as pets: even if you raised them from the time they were tiny cubs, and even if they cuddle up against you now and then, should you fall down and knock yourself unconscious, your grown-up lion or tiger or jaguar will still see you as a piece of meat to be chewed on, rather than a member of its family to be protected. That's just their nature. In the same way, a soulless vampire may be capable of some degree of loyalty to members of its own species, but sooner or later all humans are on the menu.
(no subject)
indeed
::and for the second time in twenty-four hours...ponders the paradox that is Spike::