I've been in the Buffy fandom for a while.
You tend to see the same questions come up over and over
about unexplained or unresolved plot threads.
And as shows that prioritize emotional truth
over plot consistency,
that's kind of to be expected.
So, most of these, I don't actually have a problem with
because to me, that's not really what Buffy is about.
But there's one of these common fan gripes that I wanted to address,
because I think it deserves a closer look
And that's the question of the inconsistencies
between Angel and Spike, and their souls.
Angel, who without a soul is a terrifying sadistic killer,
and Spike, who with and without a soul
seems to be pretty much the same guy.
So, the question often goes:
"Why is Angel "absolved" from his crimes by calling Angelus a different person,
but Spike doesn't have a... Spike-elus equivalent.
In this case, I don't have to use my
"get-out-of-jail-the-writers-are-people-and-sometimes-plot-holes-are-just-holes" card.
The answer, here, I think
not only makes philosophical sense,
but holds up logically, too.
Let's get into it.
Season 2 of Buffy gives us the "clearest" depiction of the function of the soul
with the Angelus arc.
When Angel loses his soul in "Surprise," he becomes amoral and evil,
but also appears to be a totally different person.
It's corroborated by the text.
"Dream on, schoolgirl. Your boyfriend is dead."
"I'm sorry I didn't get to see you.
Our little brain tour notwithstanding"
"Another time."
This separation is to the point that when Angel gets his soul back in Becoming Part 2,
there's a stretch, almost like a lag,
where Angel literally has no idea what's going on,
as if he hasn't been present for the whole time
that Angelus has been wreaking havoc.
"Buffy... what's going on...?"
"I don't remember..."
This already emphasizes the dual role that the soul has.
It's both the ability to make moral choices,
*and* it's the source of identity.
Because these things are interlocked.
Identity is formed based on the choices we make
If, without a soul, beings can't act out of anything but self-interest,
then, they don't really have full free will.
Much of this makes sense in the initial context of vampires as
the symbolic impediment to adulthood, as beings who can't grow up.
"You were my SIRE man...
...you were my YODA"
"Things change."
"Not us, not demons."
So, as their choices are limited to those of impulse and self interest,
so too is the identity that they can build.
How many times can we look back to five years ago,
one year. Six months. And think:
"I barely recognize that person."
It doesn't negate responsibility for mistakes we've made,
but, in the time that we've reflected and made new choices,
we've evolved into new people.
With Angel and Angelus, this takes a metaphorical, and dramatized depiction
of two literal people sharing a body, and memories.
But I don't think this invalidates Angel's guilt over Angelus's actions
for him, or for the audience.
He's responsible because he *feels* responsible.
Just as we might "not be that person anymore" from an earlier time in our lives,
it doesn't mean that we don't feel responsible for those actions.
In fact, it's because of them that we're the person we are today.
And, in Angel's case, Angel the guy very much does not exist without Angelus.
In the metaphysics of identity, the Ship of Theseus is a thought experiment
that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced
remains fundamentally the same object.
It goes something like this.
The Greek hero Theseus had a ship that was kept in a museum.
And as the years went by, the wooden parts of the ship began to rot,
and were replaced by new ones.
After a century or so, every part had been replaced.
The question, then, is if the restored ship is the same object as the original.
Then, we ask ourselves, what if the removed pieces were stored in a warehouse?
And eventually technology cured their rot,
and those pieces were reassembled into a ship.
Is this reconstructed ship the original ship?
And if it is, then what about the restored ship in the harbor?
What's that?
Consider this analogy regarding Angel and Angelus.
These are those two ships.
In this context, the coexistence of Angel and Angelus
as two separate consciousnesses makes sense.
Orpheus raises a few eyebrows for this portrayal, something we hadn't really seen before.
But I read it two ways.
First of all, this is a dream, so it's all metaphysical.
Second, from a philosophical point of view, Angel, like us,
is also witnessing the battle between two of his "selves."
The self that answers the call to higher action, and the self of ego and impulse.
When he lost his soul and got it back again, we might theorize that as
the moment the "Angelus-model ship" was reawakened after its 200 year slumber.
Finally, if we understand choices and the identity we build from them are interlocked,
then every choice that has made Angel *Angel* is metaphysically embedded in the soul itself
which we've seen has some degree of tangible properties.
So, the soul is like a little storage unit for all the choices that together
are the backup drive for the person themselves.
Or, at least, in these incredibly uncommon cases of vampires turning into souled beings.
"BEFORE IT WAS ALL THE COOL NEW THING"
So that's why the switch in Innocence and Awakening is so dramatic.
When Angel loses his soul now,
he's effectively regressing *150 years of growth.
This also explains why Spike pre- and post- soul
isn't as distinct as Angel and Angelus are.
It's an uneven comparison.
Pre-soul Spike and Spike with a soul for a few weeks
is different than Angelus and Angel with a soul for 150 years.
The soul is just the ability to choose.
It isn't immediate goodness.
In fact, post-souled Angel is actually more similar to post-souled Spike. It just happened a long time ago.
So instead of looking at it like a switch from Angel to Angelus and vice versa,
it's more like a continuum of four people:
Liam, Angelus, Angelus with a soul, and the Angel we know in the shows.
Angelus getting a soul doesn't restore Liam.
Liam is dead.
He's also not Angel, yet.
He's Angelus, with a conscience
but a conscience alone doesn't make you a good person,
nor does it change you, unless you let it.
If the soul automatically made good person, it would be meaningless.
Post-souled Angel isn't a spiky-haired hero.
"CAUSE I'M THE DARK AVENGER"
In the scene in "Darla" where he tries to rejoin the Fanged Four, he's basically the same person,
he's only got these 'Angelus-flavored-choices' defining who he is.
The only difference is now he's able to feel bad about it.
He repeatedly tries to rejoin Darla,
he tries to convince her he's what he was, and he wants to be that, because that's...
the thing he's been the longest.
Even after he accepts that he's changed,
we see dark-angry-50s-disdain-for-humanity-Angel
let a paranoia demon feed on the Hyperion Hotel.
After brooding some more and eating a 5-second-rule-dead-guy off a diner floor,
he ends up wandering aimless, eating rats.
Even with a soul, *this* Angel isn't *this* Angel.
Change. Takes. Time.
I find it all very relatable.
None of us are demons who lose our souls,
with every (new) choice we make, we are replacing parts of ourselves,
building that new ship.
That's why we might cringe at past behaviors and beliefs
and "oh god, did I really say that, was that me?"
That's a good thing.
If we find our old mistakes embarrassing and unrecognizable, that means we've grown.
And I think that's kind of the point.