I thought that I had reached the nadir of my feelings for Angel...

[butterfly]

Buffy's speech on Tuesday about Angel really made me want to hurt him.

She's idealized him and their relationship. She's never gotten over him.

Because she was sixteen when he kissed her and seventeen when he slept with her and she sent him to Hell. He should have known better.

And then when you factor in the implication on Angel that he was just using her to get over Darla.

He's still the thing that she loved most in this world. She's an old girlfriend who sent him to a hell dimension.

Comments

[sugarhigh9104.livejournal.com]

She's idealized him and their relationship.

And so have I. He should have been a first love, a high school relationship, but because of the way she's idealized him, he's become so much more. And I've done the exact same thing about their relationship that she has on the show. So I've never gotten over him the way I should have either, which was why I was so vicious about Reilly. (Although I do kinda disagree with what I think you're saying about the way Angel views her. I think she was the great love of his life and I don't think he's gotten over her either. I don't think she was a cast-off for him at all.)


Ant

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

My feelings probably stem from the fact that I never viewed their relationship as ideal. I was over Angel pretty much the first minute that I saw him. I never saw their love as This Amazing Thing.

And I don't know. They've done so much in Angel to trivalize the B/A relationship. The thing that bugs me the most is implying that she was a stand in for Darla in Guise Will Be Guise.

And, yeah, he was willing to kill Darla for Buffy, but Spike was willing to kill Dru for her and no one's saying that Spike didn't love Dru. Killing Darla was his big 'proof' that he loved Buffy.

[kita0610.livejournal.com]

He had no business fucking her.

But he's still loved her. Still does, in all likelihood. He has stated multiple times he never loved Darla. He killed Darla FOR Buffy in fact.

The AtS writers are trying damned hard to make their show separate, likely because this is to be BtVS' last season. But if it wasn't for Buffy, there wouldn't be an Angel- in any sense of the word, not just show-wise.

He became a mensch to be with her, then he gave up his humanity to protect her from an early death (irony thy name is PTB). He needed a retreat for three months to get over her ironic early death. He went to see her immediately post-Epiphany, upon hearing of the death of her mother, even though he still wasn't right with his own family yet. And when he found out she came back from the dead, he "had" to see her. And he has never been Mr. Emote. When he came back from seeing her, his so called freinds were making fun of him- I wouldn't share my true feelings with them either. If it seems that he is moving on, well, he doesn't have much choice, as far as he knows.

The problem is not Angel the character, it is the incredible arrogance and stupidity of the networks.

Re:

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

Possibly. But it's hard for me to give Angel the benefit of the doubt... well, ever.

[kita0610.livejournal.com]

Yea, I know.

I feel the same way about Xander. *G*