So when I was supposed to see the monster in Spike again, I had major cognitive dissonance, because I thought he'd gone beyond that.

Yeah, this was my issue as well.

Also, later in Bargaining, he rejects the 'bot completely.

So when I was supposed to see the monster in Spike again, I had major cognitive dissonance, because I thought he'd gone beyond that.

Yeah, I think they leaned too hard on the assumption that people would stick with "soulless vampire = evil." I can totally see why you would've thought they were going there, Susan; I thought they were going there myself until somewhere around Smashed, and God knows it wasn't because I wanted them to.

Also, of course, I was permanently scarred by the "but if she'd just listened to him he wouldn't've had to chain her to a wall, would he?" conversation. Spike was my great learning experience on How Fandom Interaction Can Impact Your Opinion Of A Character.

ETA: Said conversation was not with Buffistas, I should make clear.

One thing with the 'bot, though, is Spike himself often seemed to know that this was the wrong path to be taking.

This is true.

Spike was my great learning experience on How Fandom Interaction Can Impact Your Opinion Of A Character.

This is also true for me.

I didn't suffer that cognitive dissonance, because I thought they gave us plenty of (albeit subtle) cues that he was just never going to get there on his own. As early as Bargaining, Spike was reveling in the violence (as an observer) of the biker demons. He was telling Dawn he'd drink from her brain stem. He wasn't trying to help Buffy regain her own life. He was telling her she was dark, like him. He was playing poker with demons, for kittens. He was offering to steal. His reaction to Buffy in OM,WF was essentially 'first I'll kill her, then I'll save her.' Their initial consummation was nasty. After sex, he was nastier (the only thing better than killing a slayer would be...). It went on and on all season. I couldn't figure out why people thought the demon egg-capades were out of character, in AYW.

He wasn't trying to help Buffy regain her own life. He was telling her she was dark, like him

Here I believe he thought she was like him. He wasn't trying to convert her, but to open her eyes.

I couldn't figure out why people thought the demon egg-capades were out of character, in AYW.

Because it was dumb? Put him in peril?

I had a little of that cognitive dissonance, but it was resolved by my saying to myself "Right, he's still evil". Even when he wasn't trying to be or was actively trying to be "good". No moral compass

He wasn't trying to help Buffy regain her own life. He was telling her she was dark, like him

Here I believe he thought she was like him. He wasn't trying to convert her, but to open her eyes.

Me, too. Buffy's had a lot of people tell her she was dark (First Slayer and Dracula come immediately to mind), hasn't she?

Spike was my great learning experience on How Fandom Interaction Can Impact Your Opinion Of A Character.

This is also true for me.

Oh yeah. Gospel.

He wasn't trying to help Buffy regain her own life. He was telling her she was dark, like him

Here I believe he thought she was like him. He wasn't trying to convert her, but to open her eyes.

I agree, but that certainly doesn't tell me he's good, or grown beyond the evil. Were he good (or good enough), he would have realized sooner, that his relationship with Buffy was destroying most of what he loved about her, and that she was screwed up enough to not care. I do think he honestly thought she was like him, now (well, then) though. Was it in his little rant in Normal Again, that he sort of realized she wasn't? I think he called her a martyr.

I couldn't figure out why people thought the demon egg-capades were out of character, in AYW.

Because it was dumb? Put him in peril?

I probably should have qualified that, because there were two (common) reasons I saw around fandom, for people rejecting that. The most common (and not here, but it was the one I had in mind when I made that post) was that Spike wouldn't do anything bad, now (then).

The dumb/put-him-in-peril angle is the other, and wasn't what I was thinking of, but it didn't ping as OoC, so much as not the best (writing) idea. This is the character that got Dru the Judge jigsaw puzzle, and then found out he had enough humanity in him to offend the Judge. He let Harmony in on his gem of Amara plans, and then staked her, when she was wearing the gem. He didn't want the word to get sucked into Acathla hell, but didn't stick around to help Buffy finish off Angelus. He tied Buffy up to make her love him.

He's had plans (can't remember the particular) which he's abandoned because he got bored. I guess I saw him as emotional-enough to not think things through, and deal in the eggs for some quick cash. It's not that he's stupid (although I think he's been dumbed down in later seasons, and I do wish that hadn't happened). He is bright, but he is more impulsive than he is smart. I can see (more) where people found it OoC for the reasons you cite though, ita.

As early as Bargaining, Spike was reveling in the violence (as an observer) of the biker demons. He was telling Dawn he'd drink from her brain stem. He wasn't trying to help Buffy regain her own life. He was telling her she was dark, like him. He was playing poker with demons, for kittens. He was offering to steal. His reaction to Buffy in OM,WF was essentially 'first I'll kill her, then I'll save her.'

Except for the encouraging Buffy to go dark, I don't see any of those things as being indicative of anything other than a man with a blunt way of expressing himself and a world view of "me and mine first". Yeah, he's not Lifetime Movie Hero material, but not balls-out evil either.

Yeah, I think they leaned too hard on the assumption that people would stick with "soulless vampire = evil."

In retrospect, I think a lot of the appeal to various people *of* Spike was the whole notion of goodness by choice, rather than by something innate (soul). Which, y'know, big picture and all, kind of completely undermines the moral framework of the fictional universe.

Except for the encouraging Buffy to go dark, I don't see any of those things as being indicative of anything other than a man with a blunt way of expressing himself and a world view of "me and mine first". Yeah, he's not Lifetime Movie Hero material, but not balls-out evil either.

Without his history as context, I'm with you connie. But see, we did have his history, and nothing showed us he "got good." Heck, if nothing else (and I can't believe I didn't mention it), we have Smashed. The minute his suspected his chip was out, he tried to feed on someone. The point is, we had no reason to think he was in redemptionville. Better than active-serial-killer isn't the equivalent of good, particularly in this 'verse.

eta...

Which, y'know, big picture and all, kind of completely undermines the moral framework of the fictional universe.

Heh, funny semi-xpost