Re: Re: OT: Murder, morality, etc.

[danspector@xxxxxxxxx]

(Taking "Angel" out of the subject line, since we've gone back to the
original topic)

CDS, yes, this is something which we could go around in circles for a
while. Which doesn't mean I'm done circling.

Jolie, again, I don't consider grieving to excuse a crime. Yes, some
people kill for revenge, but many others choose not to do so. Because
they know it's wrong; because it lowers them to the level of the person
who killed the person they're avenging, because it dishonors the dead by
taking focus off of their life and putting it on the vigilante and
his/her quest. (Much like Willow leaving Tara to rot on the floor,
which I hated, or Buffy and Xander barely grieving over the loss of
their friend.) Ultimately, it's selfish. I'm upset so I'm going to do
what I want and who cares whether it's legal or who might get hurt
(again, escaped murderers now laughing it up in Mexico) or how it might
affect the other people who care about me (or, say, Warren's mom) or
whoever else might get hurt while I'm indulging myself (goodbye, Rack,
and nearly Giles, and nearly the entire world) or whether it's what Tara
would have wanted (you'll notice she damn near kills Giles when he
mentions that, because Willow knows Tara would be horrified by what
she's become and doesn't want to think about it). 

People have emotional impulses all the time. Strong ones, justified
ones. The trick is to control yourself when you know your emotions are
urging you to do what you know is wrong. Like I said, Warren was afraid
that Katrina was going to have him arrested, and ashamed that she had
shattered Jonathan and Andrew's illusions and called what they were
doing "rape" (which it was), and embarassed that his plan had failed,
and heartbroken that she was walking out of his life again (because I
think he did love her) and angry that nothing ever worked out the way he
wanted it to.

And NONE of that, not the fear, not the shame, not the embarassment, not
the heartbreak, and not the anger, makes it all right for him to conk
her with the champagne bottle. Even though he never intended to kill
her, much less torture her and wait until he had an audience before
skinning her alive.

Willow's faced emotional upset before. When she found out about Oz and
Veruca, she wanted--really, REALLY, wanted--to curse them and make
them suffer.

But she couldn't. Because Willow's "not like that, you see. She's a
hero" (to steal a quote from Giles, re Buffy). Because no matter how
angry she is, she'd never do anything so fundamentally evil. Because
even though Veruca "thought for a second there you might actually play
rough", Willow can't do things like that. She (to quote Veruca again)
"[doesn't] have the teeth." Until Marti and Joss screwed her over,
changed her character and made her nothing more than a murderer, waiting
for the next time she's angry enough to kill.

(I don't believe Willow stopped just because she couldn't hurt Oz. If
that were the case, she could have simply taken revenge on Veruca,
instead. Granted, Veruca showed up before Willow could try anything
like that, but I think that it's pretty clear by Willow's expression
when she stops the spell that she isn't going to be able to curse anyone
that day, not even the werewhore. And again, Marti confirms this via
Veruca's comments [see above], so I'm pretty sure I've got the writer's
take on this.)

Emotions are not a blank check for violence. Heck, Spike's got emotions
coming out of his ears in the bathroom....

Thoth, although I wouldn't be surprised if they try and pawn it all off
on the magicks, that argument won't hold water legally. First of all,
Willow didn't show any of the signs you mention of being dissociative
(hope that's the right word) until after she'd absorbed Rack's magic.
So even if MagicBoxWillow is insane, that doesn't get her off the hook
for Warren's (and Rack's) murders.

And the legal standard is being able to distinguish right from wrong.
Even in the finale, I think Willow quite clearly knows what she's doing
is wrong (that's why she attacks Giles when he mentions Tara, and why
Xander is ultimately able to stop her), she just doesn't want to hear
it.

But even if Willow were legally insane because of the magic, she would
still be responsible, because she chose to get "drunk". If you choose
to incapacitate yourself, your incapacity does not excuse your crimes.
(Check out one of the greatest "Law & Order" eps ever, Season 5's "Pro
Se" for more on this. Dennis O'Hare plays a psychotic homeless man who,
once he's back on his anti-psychotic medicine, turns out to be a
brilliant and effective lawyer on his own behalf. But because he made
the choice to stop taking his meds [like Willow, knowing but not caring
about the consequences], he's still guilty.)

Legally, Willow's screwed. But this is a corner Joss may very well
chose to cut.

Tony, powerful sentiments and good to hear someone agreeing with me :)
"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind" to quote an old saying.  

Closer to home, I again ask the revenge-minded to consider Warren's
mother (briefly seen in "Flooded"). Does she not have reasons to hate
the girl who skinned her son alive? Is not her grief (a mother whose
child has been brutally murdered, with every effort made to maximize
Warren's pain) as righteous as Willow's? Do you think Willow's "he had
it coming" excuse will cut any more slack with her than Warren's "I
wasn't aiming at Tara" excuse did with Willow? Should Buffy therefore
let Mother Meers hack Willow into Wiccan-flavored strips of beef jerky,
because she's "grieving"?

In "Innocence", Joss made all of this clear. Enyos tells Jenny what
they serve is Vengeance, not Justice. He makes the difference very
clear:

"Vengeance is a living thing. It passes through generations. It
commands. It kills."

In other words, it is NOT the careful reasoning to right a wrong, just
an angry desire for pain and violence, and who cares what else happens?  

The gypsies' desire for vengeance is what got Enyos, Theresa, the
shopgirl, Jenny, Doug Perren, Malcolm and his family and so many others
killed. They could have simply staked Angel, but they wanted him to
suffer. Now they're dead and so are so many others.

Warren's desire for vengeance (on Buffy, for foiling the robbery) got
Tara killed. He could have been grateful to escape (you think Buffy
would have hunted him if he left Sunnydale? Me, neither.), but he
wanted revenge. Now he's a human onion.

Willow's desire for vengeance is not any better, IMO. Joss only knows
how he's going to get past what she did, but he's probably not going to
even try.

My guess is, either he's going to blame it all on "the magicks" (which
was still Willow's choice) or he'll give her a mini-Angel arc (which
will be trite, damaging to the much harder journeys of Angel and Faith,
and not even the primary "I'm sorry" arc on the show, because of Spike.)

Of course that's probably the point. My best guess is that Tara was
murdered and Willow was turned into a murderer just so Dawnie can
eventually say to Buffy "you forgave Willow, so why can't you forgive
Spike? He really really loves you, and he's trying to change--that's
why he got the soul." And then Buffy and Spike fall into a Twue Wuv
smooch. Awwww. (Or, for me, "aw, fuck!")

Dan